Following the Bush Administration's rejection of the Kyoto Protocol in March, the United States declined to participate in these negotiations, which ended with agreement among the parties to proceed without the United States. The United States has indicated it would seek new approaches based on voluntary measures and market mechanisms, but has declined to proclaim a timeframe for a new proposal." (Justus, 3) The policy approach has been intriguing. The fear of global warming from an increase in greenhouse gases has become a major science policy discussion during the past fifteen years. Seeking solutions to a number of questions -- How much warming is there?...How soon will it affect us?...Should we even worry? -- a growing number of lawmakers continue to argue about the advantages and disadvantages of an active government role in creating policies to address prospective climate change. How tangible is the human-created global warming threat? Another ten to fifteen years of continued warming might justify the scientific projections, but many researchers warn that waiting for this added insurance might put the Earth's people at risk for a larger dose of climate change than if actions to curb or slow the buildup of greenhouse gases were implemented now. But actions on what level or scale are necessary?

Lawmakers, here and internationally, are advising cautious courses of action to address the prospect of climate change that many believe is still theoretical and cannot be foreseen with confidence. "Given uncertainties about the timing, pace, and magnitude of global warming projections and the imprecise nature of the regional distribution of possible climate changes, and recognizing the complex feedback mechanisms within the climate system that could mask, mimic, moderate, amplify, or even reverse a greenhouse-gas-induced warming, the question is posed: What policy responses, if any, are indicated, now, or in the future?" (Fletcher, 7)

Many supporters of early actions to address potential climate change have suggested adopting a "precautionary principle" made up of a number of anticipatory, yet flexible policy responses that might...

Less narrow national responses might range from "engineering countermeasures, to passive adaptation, to prevention, and pursuit of an international law of the atmosphere. One policy widely advocated by President Bush in the early 1990s, and to some degree implemented to date, is the so-called "no regrets" approach, which in theory would not only reduce emissions of greenhouse gases but provide other benefits to society as well." (ibid) Such policy choice emphasize energy efficiency and conservation, increased renewable energy utilization, planting trees to enhance carbon dioxide sequestration from the atmosphere, and substitution of lesser or non-CO2 creating fuels. Many researchers feel that early actions might give us time to gain a better comprehension of global climate change and perhaps reduce possible negative impacts attributable to human-induced climate change, should they occur.
Conclusion

Undoubtedly, something must be done about the global climate shift. Our way of life depends on it. However, we must also realize that certain countries are readier and also more obligated to make these changes. Industrialized nations have already benefited from destroying the ozone and raising global temperatures, so it is our turn to drastically reduce our ill-advised environmental incursions. At the same time, we must understand that the third-world countries now industrializing will be put under a significant disadvantage if held to the same standards.

Bibliography

Crabb, Annabel. Blair tells U.S. To act on global climate change. The Age: Jan. 28, 2005.

Fletcher, Susan. 2001. Global Climate Change. CRS Issue Brief for Congress: Resources, Science and Industry Division.

Justus, John. 2001. Global Climate Change. CRS Issue Brief for Congress: Resources, Science and Industry Division.

Pew Center: 2004. Global Warming Basics. http://www.pewclimate.org/

Scoutas, Marie. Government Supports U.S. position on climate change. ABC News, Australia: Jan. 27, 2005.