The Kyoto Protocol was designed to fight the global warming by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Global warming is defined as the increase of the earth’s average surface temperatures due to the greenhouse effect, which acts to trap heat that would have otherwise escaped from earth. The Kyoto Protocol is able to reduce global warming by forcing countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, therefore reducing the greenhouse effect. The initial goal of the Kyoto Protocol was to reduce worldwide greenhouse gas emissions 5% below their 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012 (Jason Shogren, 2004). The Kyoto Protocol is able to achieve this goal by setting different and specific emission reduction targets for each industrialized nation. For example, 7%
…show more content…
Countries had difficulties coming to a consensus on global warming due to the intertwined relationship between countries economies and fossil fuels. Coming to a consensus on global warming was difficult to achieve, especially for developed countries because majority of their economic growth has largely been fueled by fossil fuels. Fossil fuels such as oil and coal are undoubtedly the lubricant of the global economy because they are fundamental to the transportation and production of both goods and consumers. For example, oil currently supplies more energy to the global economy than any other fuel (IPCC, 2013). Our society and economy is dependent on fossil fuels because they are widely available and relatively inexpensive compared to other sources of energy. Due to fossil fuels importance in powering our lifestyles and economy it was difficult for countries to come to a consensus on regulating these …show more content…
In 2012 Canada became the first signatory country to announce their 6% reduction target would not be met by 2012 (National Post, 2011). This target was in line with targets accepted by other developed countries but contrasted with Australia, an economy similar to Canada’s and heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Canada withdrew from the protocol because they were unable to meet targets and felt the emission targets were unfair. Canada felt the targets were unfair because countries with similar economic backgrounds as Canada such as Australia were not subject to as strict constraints. Canada was unable to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 6% due to tar sand oil production in Alberta. Oil production in Alberta forced Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions to grow significantly. Canada argued the economic costs of adhering to the protocol’s green house gas emission reductions would be detrimental to the economy and was the leading factor that caused Canada to drop out of the
Countries had difficulties coming to a consensus on global warming due to the intertwined relationship between countries economies and fossil fuels. Coming to a consensus on global warming was difficult to achieve, especially for developed countries because majority of their economic growth has largely been fueled by fossil fuels. Fossil fuels such as oil and coal are undoubtedly the lubricant of the global economy because they are fundamental to the transportation and production of both goods and consumers. For example, oil currently supplies more energy to the global economy than any other fuel (IPCC, 2013). Our society and economy is dependent on fossil fuels because they are widely available and relatively inexpensive compared to other sources of energy. Due to fossil fuels importance in powering our lifestyles and economy it was difficult for countries to come to a consensus on regulating these …show more content…
In 2012 Canada became the first signatory country to announce their 6% reduction target would not be met by 2012 (National Post, 2011). This target was in line with targets accepted by other developed countries but contrasted with Australia, an economy similar to Canada’s and heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Canada withdrew from the protocol because they were unable to meet targets and felt the emission targets were unfair. Canada felt the targets were unfair because countries with similar economic backgrounds as Canada such as Australia were not subject to as strict constraints. Canada was unable to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 6% due to tar sand oil production in Alberta. Oil production in Alberta forced Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions to grow significantly. Canada argued the economic costs of adhering to the protocol’s green house gas emission reductions would be detrimental to the economy and was the leading factor that caused Canada to drop out of the