CO2 Increase Increasing

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Mr. Anderson, Mar 21, 2004.

  1. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Nov 1, 2001
  2. richland macrumors member

    Mar 2, 2004

    damn our president :mad:
  3. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Jan 6, 2004
    less trees to breathe in the CO2? just a guess really but this is worrisome
  4. wdlove macrumors P6


    Oct 20, 2002
    I found this interesting in the article

    Asked to explain the stepped-up rate, climatologists were cautious, saying data needed to be further evaluated. But Asia immediately sprang to mind.

    "China is taking off economically and burning a lot of fuel. India, too," said Pieter Tans, a prominent carbon-cycle expert at NOAA's Boulder lab.

    If memory serves correctly, they are not covered by the Kyoto Protocol.
  5. caveman_uk Guest


    Feb 17, 2003
    Hitchin, Herts, UK
    How dare they use more fuel... what will folks put in their gas guzzling SUVs if the Chinese and Indians are burning all the fuel? Quick, surely we must be able to invade them....Isn't al-queda based in China or something?

    The above was hyperbole and case you thought I meant it.
  6. Dippo macrumors 65816


    Sep 27, 2003
    Charlotte, NC
    Not just burning fossil fuels but also burning coal for power production contributes to the increase in carbon dioxide.

    I guess we are just going to have to switch to nuclear :)
  7. Raid macrumors 68020


    Feb 18, 2003
    As I recall neither is the United States. Who after being involved in the draft of the protocol decided not to sign it. :(

    Sometimes I wonder how close we will come to killing the entire planet before we smarten up?
  8. MongoTheGeek macrumors 68040


    Sep 13, 2003
    Its not so much where you are as when you are.
    No one is covered by it right now because there weren't enough signatures to ratify. Ratification was based on emissions. So if like the USA, Germany and Japan signed on it would be in effect but if dozen lesser countries signed it wouldn't be.

    Last time I checked Japan hadn't signed on either(rather ironic eh?)

    There are issues though with the treaty. The way its phrased is bizarre. A certain percentage decrease from the levels that were in use 5 years before the treaty was written. There are a large number of countries which are exempted as "developing" Including the PRC and India.

    Bill Clinton did sign the treaty but the senate never ratified it. Even if Bush hadn't withdrawn the treaty from the senate it never would have been ratified. There are people who said that he signed it because he knew it would never be ratified.

Share This Page