The Kyoto Protocol's effectiveness without United States participation

Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol

An analysis of the effectiveness of an international agreement to mitigate the consequences of Climate Change without the involvement of the United States

Climate change, also known in some circles as global warming, is a phenomenon that has been the subject of a vast amount of attention in recent decades. This issue stands the potential not only to threaten many animal species around the world, but also has the potential to virtually eliminate the human race by making the climate of the earth inhospitable. Although it may be somewhat unlikely that the human species will become extinct anytime in the near future, the limitations of the planet to support the exponentially growing human population are becoming increasingly more salient as this field of research continues developing. With the world population recently climbing to over seven billion people, many researchers are questioning the natural ecosystem's ability to support the global population (Hanna and Osborne-Lee). Theoretically, humans will reach a point in which the regenerative capacity of the planet will no longer support the physical requirements of the population; if that point has not been crossed already.

It has been argued that if drastic steps are not taken billions of people, within this century, could be without many of the services that the earth naturally provides such as clean water or farmable land (Hanjra and Qureshi). Every attempt to address this situation has failed due to the lack of political support from industrialized nations; in particular the United States. The world's biggest polluters, the United States and China, are continuing to rapidly expand their greenhouse emissions which have acted to drastically accelerate the rate in which greenhouse gases are accumulating in the atmosphere. Despite the fact that China is one of the world's major emitters, it has agreed to sign on to the Kyoto agreement in the past and has shown a rather large commitment to sustainable practices. The U.S. On the other hand has made a rather weak effort to negotiate with the international community and is also the only industrialize country to fail to sign the Kyoto protocol (Facts on File News Services). This analysis will focus on whether an international agreement can be effective without the full participation of the United States government.

Background on CO2 Concentrations

Climate change, which is at least partly due to the rising concentrations of greenhouses in the atmosphere, can be thought of in terms of one of the main components of greenhouse gases which is carbon dioxide (CO2). Exponential increases in greenhouse gas emissions, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels, have led to a carbon dioxide concentration of roughly 394 parts per million in the atmosphere (CO2 Now). The current concentrations of CO2 are alarming to many researchers because several scientists have claimed that the earth's highest level of CO2 that the Earth can sustainably support is somewhere around 350 parts per million (Hensen, Sato and Kharecha). The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international climate task force that includes scientists from all over the world, has stated that at 450 parts per million of CO2 levels that there is roughly a fifty two percent chance that catastrophic climate change will not occur (IPCC). Furthermore, to have any chance at reducing the exponential increases in emissions in order to stabilize the CO2 concentrations, many researchers have also predicted that there must be rapid reductions in pollution made within the next five years or else a threshold point could potentially be crossed.

Discussion

With the scientific understanding of the challenges that lay ahead becoming progressively sophisticated coupled with the fact that the results of many new studies are increasingly alarming, it is reasonable to suspect that the United States must not only play a part in climate change mitigation but this country should lead a worldwide effort. However even if the U.S. takes drastic steps to reduce its emissions then China must also curb its growth and utilization of fossil fuels as well to meet these challenges. China is rich with coal in its borders which provides much of the country with electricity and this industry is growing at an alarming rate. Within the last five years it has been estimated that China will open two new coal fired power plants each and every week (Clayton). Not only are there an incredible number of new plants being brought online in China, each of these power plants has an estimated lifespan of fifty years or more which compounds the problems.

Yet again, from China's perspective, they argue that they have the right to develop in the same way that the United States did. The U.S. burned cheap coal to fuel its industrialization, advance its economy, and improve the quality of life for its citizens. If it were not for the cheap electricity, then the U.S. could not have developed its modern economy on the same trajectory. However, if China develops on the same trajectory as the U.S. did then there is really no hope that emissions can be reduced back down to the 350 ppm CO2 levels or even the 450 ppm CO2 levels which have been identified by the scientific community.

When all of this is put in perspective a rather bleak picture emerges. If future generations of humans are going to have an opportunity to live on a planet that looks even remotely similar to the one that we grow up on then something must be done quickly. However, capitalism is a system that is built upon growth and consumption. Each generation consumes more and more stuff and the consequences of this have led us to the situation we are in now. Although this has led to people being able to live with many material resources and nice lifestyles, unfortunately in may be that future generations will have to pay dearly for this extravagance.

Within the United States, many institutions have acted to become more sustainable voluntarily. However, many more have not. Many institutions shun sustainable practices because they are expensive and the economic conditions are less than ideal. Thus do not expect voluntary commitments to be established on the levels that are sufficient enough to meet these challenges. They must be forced to change and there are two sources of external and internal pressures that can make this possible.

First, citizens in the U.S. can demand that their government act more responsibly. Since it is a democracy, at least in design, then this could change the political momentum. Second, external governments could also impose and enforce sanctions that would act as an incentive for change. Import tariffs could be placed on U.S. goods to offset the damage that the production of the goods has to the environment. This will be difficult to achieve because not only does the U.S. have vast amounts of international political power but they also have the most sophisticated military in the world and the U.S. has been quick to use this end to solve problems they face. Yet it is really a moral question and it must be done somehow if future generations are going to inherent a livable planet.