2 of 8

Write now Article Tools

Designed to reduce green house gas emissions, the Kyoto protocol - which is an amendment to the climate change treaty - mandates limits on greenhouse gas emissions. Many, but not all countries, have signed the agreement and in so doing, they have committed to the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions and that of other greenhouse gases. In so doing they would contribute to reducing the harmful effects of greenhouse gas to our planet.

There is both support and opposition to this agreement, thus the reason some countries, including Australia and United States of America, have not ratified it. While some countries see the Kyoto protocol as positive, others think the protocol is not stringent enough.

Perhaps the major opposition from developed countries is based on the fear that if implemented, industrialization could suffer even though many developing countries are allowed to maintain status quo, or even increase emissions under the Kyoto protocol.

Another argument being made is the "what's the use it is too late anyway," and it doesn't help that the USA, credited with the bulk of all greenhouse gas emissions, is not a party to the deal.

The cost of adhering to the protocol is another issue of concern for some countries. The protocol is costly to implement, and as such there are concerns that this commitment can be a strain on national resources, coupled with the fact that Kyoto abiding countries will have to compete with countries that are not subject to the treaty.

While these concerns might be valid to some extent, I can find little justification
for some countries not coming on board. A flawed protocol is better than no protocol and there is no time to put off, for another decade or so, action on a problem that could spell disaster for the human race.

Learn more about this author, Joan Schroeder.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about The case against the Kyoto protocol?
We want to hear your view. Write now!