Posted: 12/14/2004
Europe Looks Toward Kyoto II, Even As Many Miss Targets
NCPA’s Burnett Says “U.S. Criticized for Not Jumping Off Cliff With the Rest”
December 14, 2004 – Buoyed by Russia’s recent ratification of the Kyoto treaty on climate change, delegates from European countries assembling in Buenos Aires have begun discussions about new greenhouse gas emission limits. At the same time, according to NCPA Senior Fellow H. Sterling Burnett, European officials and environmental activists are criticizing the U.S. for not ratifying the energy rationing mandates.
“It is widely recognized that Kyoto will do nothing to stem the rise of greenhouse gases,” said NCPA Senior Fellow H. Sterling Burnett. “Far from being mocked, the U.S. should be applauded for not following the rest of the herd off the economic cliff.”
The Kyoto Treaty’s requirement of initial cuts in “greenhouse gas” emissions by 2012 finally comes into force in February, seven years after it was negotiated. “The problem is the vast majority of signatory countries are unlikely to meet their Kyoto obligations, much less go beyond them,” said Burnett.
The U.S. and Australia refused to ratify the treaty, citing a lack of scientific certainty and the treaty’s devastating effects on economic growth. In addition, most developing countries, including China and India, are not subject to Kyoto’s restrictions, making its impact on future climate change meaningless.
“To the extent that the next agreement contains binding commitment from fast growing, developing countries, it might have a chance of garnering U.S. support and modestly reducing the rise or at least the rate of rise of CO2,” said Burnett. “Yet it is extremely unlikely that most developing countries will agree to binding commitments for themselves – in fact, most are on record rejecting them.”
Burnett concluded that in the end, “by the time any proposed reductions under a new commitment period come into effect, climate science could very well show climate change to be less of a threat than is currently believed – which would tend to undercut the need for energy restrictions.”