Yes. It is wise for USA not to be part of the Kyoto treaty.
The reason why the US has avoided ratifying the Kyoto treaty is that it is not in the US national interest to do so. It's a pity that other nations don't follow this fine example of political honesty.
The Kyoto treaty is about getting worldwide agreement on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions which are promoted by the Green Movement as causing global warming and pollution of the atmosphere. We are dealing with the "global warming belief system" which is a fundamentalist religion and unscientific.
The fatal flaws of Kyoto are twofold: Firstly, the science is wrong. Secondly, such cuts in emissions of CO2 proposed are impossible to achieve. To try and do so will lead to economic disaster for any country silly enough to try it . Already we have the example of the European Union which has experimented for several years with a "Cap and Trade" system of CO2 control and reduction of emissions, which haven't been reduced, but instead resulted in considerable economic turmoil. Now they want us and the rest of the world to follow suite!
Global warmers always avoid getting involved in arguments about the background science of their belief system. Have you ever heard Al Gore in a debate challenging his beliefs. Never!
I shall start by examining what is meant by the words "pollution" and "pollute".
My dictionary says: "to pollute"; to destroy the purity or sanctity of; make foul or filthy; contaminate or defile (environment); pollution (noun).
Are we polluting the atmosphere by emitting "greenhouse gases"? That depends on what constitutes "greenhouse gases" which are derived from man's burning of fossil fuels, and also by a host of other ways in Nature but conveniently ignored by the Kyoto enthusiasts.
Greenhouse gases themselves do not equate with pollution. Greenhouse gases do not pollute the atmosphere.
Coal, which is essentially free carbon, burns to give CO2, plus contaminates which come from any impurities. Hydrocarbons, such as gasoline, burn to give CO2 and H2O or water vapor, and usually have less contaminates to worry about. The huge amount of energy derived from burning these fuels is put to good use by man.
Water vapor is by far the most abundant greenhouse gas in our atmosphere, sometimes at 40,000 ppm (depending on humidity) compared to 385 ppm for CO2. It has the wonderful physical property of existing in 3 phases in the atmosphere; as a gas (water vapor), a liquid (rain and low level cloud) and as a solid (ice particles, snow, high level cloud, cirrus). The interchange between these phases and the earth and ocean surface has a profound effect on our weather and climate in general. By comparison, CO2 gas remains only as a passive trace gas component with little if any proven measurable effect on climate or global warming.
Carbon dioxide is not polluting the atmosphere. CO2 is a harmless, invisible gas which is the life blood of the biosphere, and that includes us! No way can CO2 be regarded as a dangerous gas that is harmful to man. Every life form is composed of carbon compounds. CO2 is a vital trace component of the atmosphere. Crop yields and growth rates are greatly enhanced with CO2 atmospheric levels of 1000 ppm or more. We need more, not less, CO2 in the atmosphere!
What about true pollution? The true pollution derived from fuel combustion is due to minor or trace impurities. Already advanced technology has been applied to the problem. Modern power stations treat and remove impurities from the coal feed stock and have electrostatic precipitators to eliminate particulates from the combustion gases. When necessary scrubbers are used to remove water soluble sulfur and nitrogen oxides, and other minor pollutants. Ideally what comes out the stack is harmless CO2 and water. Similarly, automobile exhausts are purified by passing through a catalytic converter.
The serious misuse of the word "pollution" to include CO2 emissions has resulted in a vast misapplication of State and Federal Government funds and the imposition of stupid policies with harmful economic effects. This war against pollution is directed towards the wrong target, CO2, which, if a person, would surely sue for deformation of character!
Governments should not try and pick winners in the energy field. This is a job for private enterprise. There can be and are tax breaks for R & D expenditures, and then let the best development idea win.
The Kyoto treaty, with its drastic cuts on CO2 emissions, is totally unnecessary. It is bad science being used to impose bad policy. The underlying reason is to promote expensive renewable energy such as wind, solar, biofuels and geothermal most of which are uneconomic without Government subsidy. By taxing CO2 emissions this allows a cash flow to be directed towards renewables. Big business has investments in this, which is protected by maintaining the false global warming scare bandwagon.
In summary, the Kyoto treaty is just bad science coupled with a fundamentalist religion. It should be avoided by the USA and other wise countries. In my opinion, energy development should focus on fossil fuels and their derivatives rather than having an eco-religious wild goose chase after expensive renewables.