by Cassandra Chowdhury

Created on: July 15, 2008

There are many theories about how the world will end: whether it be from plagues, from alien invasions, or from the Rapture. Recently, many people have come to see global warming and the effects of greenhouse gases as a possible apocalypse. With the carbon levels within our atmosphere rising drastically and our planet yielding more unpleasant results because of our carelessness, it has become a high priority to heal the environment. Indeed, Winston Churchill spoke correctly when he said "the era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences." Now that the signs of this procrastination are becoming apparent, measures are being taken around the world to revive our planet. The Kyoto Protocol is by far the most well-known and the first international measure taken thus far to lower greenhouse gas emissions. The plan calls for all included countries to lower their greenhouse gas usage by 5% between 2008 and 2012. Though the Protocol has noble aims, however, its benefits are far outnumbered by its costs and shortcomings. The National Center for Policy Analysis stated that the Kyoto Protocol's "importance is largely symbolic. After eight years and tens-of-millions of tax dollars spent: Kyoto is, indeed, an expensive symbol" (Burnett). I believe that the United States was right in not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, and that many improvements need to be made in the treaty before it is going to be effective.

Personally, I am greatly concerned about global warming and consider myself an environmentalist. This is why it surprised and disappointed me, as I learned more about the Kyoto Protocol, to realize that I saw many problems in the treaty. The greatest concern about the Kyoto Protocol is that its costs greatly outweigh its benefits. In a study done by Nordhaus and Boyer, it was estimated that the net global cost of the Kyoto Protocol is $716 billion, and the benefit to cost ratio is approximately 1-7(232). A study by Barrett casts doubt upon the idea that Kyoto will be able to sustain itself and states that it is quite likely that the costs of the Protocol will be too much for many countries, forcing them to drop out of the treaty (which will not be difficult since it has no means of enforcement). The National Center for Policy Analysis claims that "Kyoto's emission cuts would reduce U.S. gross domestic product somewhere between 3.6 percent and 5.1 percent

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next Page >>