Advancements in technology over the past few decades have distressed the Earth’s environment globally. Due to the increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions released into the atmosphere, mostly due to human activities, there has been a large concern over the dangers of global warming. Between 1990 and 2008, global GHG emissions have increased by approximately 1.5 times, causing an international concern (Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, 2015). Although GHGs are naturally formed, human activity significantly stimulates their production through the release of CO2 by burning fossil fuels in industry, transport and in creating energy. The negative outcome of the immense GHGs released are increasing temperatures and amount of precipitation globally,
…show more content…
Firstly, China (which shares about 23% of GHG emissions worldwide), India (5% of global emissions) and several developing countries never signed the treaty to begin with (Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, 2015). All of the countries mentioned have a large contribution towards GHG emissions and will only continue to rise. Even if the Kyoto Protocol were to be successful at decreasing global emissions by 5%, the previously mentioned countries would affect the outcome and only decrease that percentage. This comes back to the main challenge of the cost of being environmentally friendly, which is an increased expense. Developing countries cannot afford paying more to become more environmentally friendly, and China and India cannot hinder their economies with increased expenses. Consequently, developing countries claimed a positive out of the protocol (Swinton and Sarkar, 2007). Therefore, the treaty should have assessed the capability of each country to become greener by studying the alternative methods to reduce the emission with respect to their costs. Moreover, the main target of reducing global emissions by 5% was an unrealistic goal. Even if all the countries worldwide joined and agreed to the treaty, only a tiny dent in GHG concentrations would have been observed (Problems with the Protocol, 2002). Therefore, the treaty should have gone into a deeper research at the carbon footprint of each nation and create a percentage based on
Firstly, China (which shares about 23% of GHG emissions worldwide), India (5% of global emissions) and several developing countries never signed the treaty to begin with (Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, 2015). All of the countries mentioned have a large contribution towards GHG emissions and will only continue to rise. Even if the Kyoto Protocol were to be successful at decreasing global emissions by 5%, the previously mentioned countries would affect the outcome and only decrease that percentage. This comes back to the main challenge of the cost of being environmentally friendly, which is an increased expense. Developing countries cannot afford paying more to become more environmentally friendly, and China and India cannot hinder their economies with increased expenses. Consequently, developing countries claimed a positive out of the protocol (Swinton and Sarkar, 2007). Therefore, the treaty should have assessed the capability of each country to become greener by studying the alternative methods to reduce the emission with respect to their costs. Moreover, the main target of reducing global emissions by 5% was an unrealistic goal. Even if all the countries worldwide joined and agreed to the treaty, only a tiny dent in GHG concentrations would have been observed (Problems with the Protocol, 2002). Therefore, the treaty should have gone into a deeper research at the carbon footprint of each nation and create a percentage based on