 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
| 0 user currently in World Affairs / Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - World Affairs / Debate - Should US oppose the Kyoto Environmental Treaty? |
 |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
Should the US oppose the Kyoto Treaty?| The US have opposed the Kyoto Treaty, again, saying that they want to make sure to keep American Jobs? Should they have done so? | Yes, Jobs are more important! |
16.7%, 4 votes | No, the Environment is more important! |
12.5%, 3 votes | WTF, who said that Jobs and Environment weren't compatible? |
70.8%, 17 votes | Multi-voting is disabled.
| |
| User | Post | ||
|
Tarale I'm not under the alfluence of incohol like some thinkle peop I am. It's just the drunker I sit here the longer I get.  Level: 73  Posts: 759/2720 EXP: 3458036 For next: 27832 Since: 03-18-04 From: Adelaide, Australia Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Yeah, that's a really good point -- that Jobs can be made, but the Environment cannot. Sure, we can plant trees, and that will HELP, but in general, the environment is irreplacable and something that can't be made by our hands. We don't even know our effect upon the Environment, but I'd figure when it's shown that something we are doing or making is doing bad things, that.... maybe some people would work out that we should stop doing that. |
|||
|
Sofie Level: 52 Posts: 1178/1210 EXP: 1028812 For next: 55028 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 187 days Last activity: 279 days |
| ||
| Jobs can be created; countries' economic state always fluctuates, and it always will. But as mentioned before, replacing what we destroy takes a lot more time than getting out of an economic depth does. I don't think anyone can answer you, Kefka, since I don't think anyone here has been homeless and without a proper income/food. But I do think most people living in such circumstances (and most of these people live in third world countries, compared to the number of homeless people in the USA) would benefit from fertile land. |
|||
Heian-794 Red Super Koopa Level: 44 Posts: 526/896 EXP: 611014 For next: 271 Since: 06-01-04 From: Kyoto, Japan Since last post: 21 days Last activity: 10 days |
| ||
| The Kyoto Treaty is pretty unfair to the US in comparison to other countries, who basically get a license to pollute as much as they want because they're not big economic powers. It should be revised so that other nations aren't getting a free ride at the US' expense. Japan isn't even in compliance with the treaty yet! |
|||
|
Kefka Indefinitely Unbanned Level: 81 Posts: 2347/3392 EXP: 4826208 For next: 166641 Since: 03-15-04 From: Pomona, CALIFORNIA BABY! Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by Tarale I'm not sure how many people read into this... yes, there does seem to be a tendency to dumb down literature, but can you honestly say it will be allowed to get so bad as to be 1984-esque? Originally posted by Tarale That's not even true... the only reason logging companies replant trees is to cut them down again. That is why they regrow the quickest growing ones only, even if they've cut down one that took a long time to grow. Definitely doesn't turn into a healthy ecosystem... Yes, there always will be homeless people, and there will be varying amounts of jobs available. Most of the issues on why the U.S. won't opt into this treaty (even Clinton didn't opt into it when he had a chance) is because the major energy corporations have a large amount of their income from particular resources, and they do not want to go through the trouble to have alternate resources. And it does take some time to do it properly... and it might even result in a FEW job losses at first, but then later on the jobs will be refilled when everything is settled... but the companies want as much money as possible NOW, and that is why they control this issue to the point that we can't get into this program. However, their stance will surely bite them in the ass in 50 years... either when people start noticing the ice caps are thinning, and USA is recorded as being the most responsible for it, or when those resources that they base their companies off of are not so plentiful anymore... So, in short, the smartest thing to do would be to follow the program... and yes, it is much more biased to the USA than many other countries, Heian... then again, the USA pollutes a lot more than the other countries, which is why this is the case. Those countries that are not big economic powers usually aren't as industrialized, so it is harder for them to pollute as much anyway. This decision to not opt into it is stupid, and it will show in 50 or less years |
|||
Steak Zora Level: 35  Posts: 322/507 EXP: 278751 For next: 1185 Since: 03-16-04 From: Ohio University Since last post: 195 days Last activity: 195 days |
| ||
| A few things for ya' guys to bear in mind about the environment and jobs: To drive agriculture in the southern Great Plains, much water must be used. This has made the water table drop all over...60 ft. or deeper at the worst points. That's a five-story building. Deeper into the earth ya' go, the more salt there will be in the ground water. If this trend keeps up, water irrigating the wheatlands will become brackish. That's just a matter of a decades, if even. The recharge point for that water table lies in the Rockies...it'll be about 10,000 years before it's recharged to where it was before. This, of course, will make food prices rise dramatically. Petrolium fields do not give up oil easily, or quickly. Oil wells & rigs, at their absolute best, yeild about 20% of the oil from a reserve (the greatest is getting, like, 30%...but that's bloody near unheard of). Extracting the rest means digging up the rock, grinding it up, and baking the oil out. We're not gonna run out of oil anytime soon...we're gonna run out of oil that's easy to get soon. Plastics will become more difficult to make, glass will return to everything (likely), necessity may yield more invention and better oil extraction tactics...that failing, we will need to find a new fuel source for automobiles, aircraft, most watercraft and anything else that uses petrolium as a base. Ethanol or vegatable oil are both often suggested as an alternative...where are we gonna get it from? I've heard corn suggested repeatedly for this...cars that run on whiskey or corn oil, etc., it's all good...until ya' get to the grocery store. Corn prices will become astronomical...this instantly affects meat prices as that corn is one of the primary grains used to feed & raise livestock. Food, again, becomes too damned expensive. Coal presents a different problem. We're not running out of that either...we've just used up all the good coal already. I don't remember the specific names offhand...but what we've got left is the soft, smoke-producing, burns cooler type. The greater marjority of coal that remains is the softest, lowest burning type...that name also escapes me right now. There isn't anywhere near enough uranium to set up nuclear power plants all over the states and get them to power things...wind generators disrupt the normal airstream and aren't a viable option except by the ocean and on the Great Plains, tidal power is an impossibility with how much sediment would fall out of the sea water, not enough larger rivers around to use hydroelectric, too much of the earth's surface would be covered in solar panels to power this country to make that effective (until we create better solar panels), and there aren't enough places around the states to make geothermal power a worthwhile endeavour, either, and gi-normous dry cells/batteries wouldn't work 'cuz a. all our appliances are AC, not DC, and b. DC currents cannot cover the kind of distance in powerlines that AC currents can, or even close to it. The bottom line remains here: our ancestors have made a mess of things, and didn't clean it up before they went. Now...we've got environmental issues. These haven't become a problem yet, but oh they will ever be the problem. Whether or not ya' think jobs are more important, or the environment is more important...the hand we were dealt leaves them both interacting. If we don't worry about the environment, thing will continue as they have under Shrub...and years from now, it will be beyond too late (it may be too late already) to do anything about it. The US will fall apart as North America is mostly unlivable. If we don't worry about getting jobs...which under Shrub, we're a bit pinched as it is (yeah...against any policy that'll cost an American job...come say that in southeastern Ohio sometime....)...then the economy goes under even faster than the pace we're already at, and the former US becomes a battleground for the rising warlords and the new world orders to claim dominance. So...they're both important. Ya' gotta worry about both. |
|||
|
Kasumi-Astra Administrator Level: 62  Posts: 957/1867 EXP: 1971846 For next: 12840 Since: 03-15-04 From: Reading, UK Uni: Sheffield, UK Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 12 hours |
| ||
| Wind power currently generates a sizable amount of power in the UK. I think it's close to 10%. That's nowhere near what we need to get off unrenewable sources, but it's still very respectable. It's a power source not to be taken lightly and it goes to show that it is possible that man can give up it's oil addiction before it's all gone. |
|||
|
Steak Zora Level: 35 Posts: 325/507 EXP: 278751 For next: 1185 Since: 03-16-04 From: Ohio University Since last post: 195 days Last activity: 195 days |
| ||
| England's sounding better all the time.... Something else to consider. I don't think humans are having a significant impact on global warming. We're doing hell to ecosystems here there & everywhere...but global warming...I think that one's out of our hands. Ice cores retrieved from Greenland and Anarctica show that the Earth can change climate very suddenly (i.e., it went from ice age to interglacial in about 30 years). CO2 levels rise more quickly from volcanic eruptions than what our industry does (i.e., Mt. Penotubo's eruption in the mid 90's spewed a healthy dose of dust and ash into the air...notably more than Mt. St. Helens [which was 0.8 cubic kilometers], and it takes a good amount of gas to get that kind of pressure). Oceanic temperatures have been rising. This has been charted by voyages over the last 30-50 years. At the current rate, the estimate is that the Arctic Ice Cap will be gone by 2020. This won't affect sea level much, since it's already floating in the Arctic Ocean. But...yeah. Santa will have to move his base of ops soon...he'll face the real prospect of "sink or swim" otherwise.   |
|||
geeogree Bloober Level: 34  Posts: 109/448 EXP: 231583 For next: 22068 Since: 03-16-04 From: Calgary, Canada Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 11 hours |
| ||
| the only problem with global warming is that all the models are based on the last 40 years of temperature readings.... which show an increase in temperature of about 3 degrees celsius... however, from the mid 30's to the 70's the temperature went down!.... eventhough the second world war increased CO2 production incredibly.... and from the 10's to about the mid 30's the temperature increased.... so, the worry about ice melting all over the world and the like, isn't a very scary thing to me.... I mean.... temperatures seem to have fluctuated over the last 100 years.... why not again?.... temps will probably go down again in the next 10-20 years....and we'll start this whole global warming scare 50 years from now  |
|||
Sokarhacd Ball and Chain Trooper Resistance is Futile You Will Be Assimilated Hab SoSlI' Quch Level: 61  Posts: 604/1757 EXP: 1799888 For next: 76708 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 6 days Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
| yeah, everyones panicking a little much...I dont think that global warming will fully happen anytime soon, and if it does, better get somewhere high up. | |||
dex IRC Lazy Network Admin Dude Level: 11  Posts: 5/46 EXP: 5848 For next: 137 Since: 11-16-04 From: St Julians, S. Wales Since last post: 116 days Last activity: 59 days |
| ||
| BBC News Article That would be a good reason for ratification of the Kyoto Treaty, the argument of the US being treated unfairly could quite easily be said of any of the major powers currently acting as signatories, the UK and Russia both have to alter gas outputs to match the treaty, though admittedly it's unfair? Yeah, perhaps, necessary? Maybe. The question is do you want our grandkids to be suffering our mistakes. |
|||
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99  Posts: 1660/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Anyone who joins is going to suffer consequences. Sacrifices must be made to make gains. | |||
|
geeogree Bloober Level: 34 Posts: 117/448 EXP: 231583 For next: 22068 Since: 03-16-04 From: Calgary, Canada Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 11 hours |
| ||
| well, what is the Kyoto Treaty really saving us from? I'm all for cutting back on harmful pollutants.... forcing plants to filter some more.... but not for greenhouse gases.... that's just silly... .in my opinion... but I'm okay with trying to stop acid rain.... or some toxic gas that isn't dealt with.... but not global warming.... no one is dying... nothing is ruined because of that.... |
|||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 1666/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by geeogree Ourselves. |
|||
|
geeogree Bloober Level: 34 Posts: 119/448 EXP: 231583 For next: 22068 Since: 03-16-04 From: Calgary, Canada Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 11 hours |
| ||
| yes.... but... what about our activities is it helping? I guess no one seems to have explicitly said what the purpose of the Kyoto Treaty is (not to me at least).... I hear a bunch of how it's better for the world.... but how? |
|||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 1668/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Okay, we're going to look at this through my eyes. Kyoto is designed to cut down on greenhouse emissions, not necessarily to combat global warming, but rather so many of the other problems caused by it. Global warming is a natural cycle, we're speeding it up. Incidently, we're also destroying the poles with pollutants. In fact, the fresh water ice in the North Pole is contaminated. Extremely so. With the winds pushing all of our pollutants (everything we put into the air can bond with other chemicals) to the north pole it is contaminating northern ecosystems. As previously mentioned acid rain is also aided by the increased amount of greenhouse gases we are pumping into the atmosphere, yeah, you ever seen what acid rain does? It doesn't burn the skin like many think, it is worse. It causes genetic mutation (yup, studies from Canada have proven this, I don't have any links right now), it ruins lakes in places like Sweden (aka a very rare commodity known as clean fresh water is now being destroyed). There are so many problems with no ratifying and acting on the treaty that it might as well be done. Frankly, I'd like my children's children to live happily and not be disgusted by their forebears for not acting upon anything. |
|||
|
Steak Zora Level: 35 Posts: 326/507 EXP: 278751 For next: 1185 Since: 03-16-04 From: Ohio University Since last post: 195 days Last activity: 195 days |
| ||
| As to the disappearance of the Ice Cap...here's why you ought to be concerned: Oceanic currents redistribute heat around the world. The turn over happens in the Arctic Ocean, mostly due to the ice cap. If the cap is gone, the turnover won't happen there. Climate worldwide will be affected. Best-case scenario: places become better suited for growing crops. Worst-case scenario: the oceanic currents stop. If the currents stop, the growing season in Europe will be all-but erased. Living in Scandinavia will like living in Greenland. The British Isles and northern coast of the mainland may become inhospitable. In short, the world economy goes to shit. One other interesting factor may result from Europe entering the deep freeze. The very worst case scenario is that an Ice Sheet may form. As to rising water...something to consider. Every oceanic port worldwide is built on the assumption that sea level is sea level, and fluctuates with the tide. If sea level changes by 2 meters, raised or lowered, all those ports will have problems. Some might not be usable. Affect them by much more than 2m, and none of them will work. Yeah, tides where most pronounced go a whole lot more than 2m, but ports aren't built there. Ports are built where tide isn't too much (meaning, rarely at 2m or more). If all these ports go to shit, the world economy is right behind it. There is a problem to the Kyoto treaty...two nations that aren't signing...both industrialized...both with standards of living about equal to US 1920's standard of living...both wanting to get modern...both with thermonuclear devices. These would be India and China. Wanting to get modern means consuming more energy. India's going through massive amounts of coal. China's not much better. Both are pumping CO2 into the atmosphere quicker than we are. Instead of telling 'em that they can't join us...perhaps we should give up some of our wonderful toys...and consume less energy. Bring down the standard of living some so that less energy is consumed, and try to make it easier for more people to acheive our level. I mean...if Ice Sheets form and start advancing, the world as will know will have come to a crashing halt. |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - World Affairs / Debate - Should US oppose the Kyoto Environmental Treaty? |
| | |
