If Japan and other countries are more sufficient in their acts of globalization, they can help with the greenhouse effect from KYOTO protocol.
The Kyoto protocal was signed in Kyoto, Japan in 1997. In this protocol, industrialised countries commited themselves to reduceing their greenhouse gas emissions by a few percent in 2008-2012 compared to the 1990 base year. The exact percentage for each country is noted in the Annex 1 of the Protocol. The reduction is partly to be done domestically, but can also be reached by investing in other countries or trading emission allowances. These possibilities for countries with a Kyoto commitment are called the Kyoto mechanisms (KYOTO protocol).
It is easy to gather that Americans want a future that has economic prosperity and clean air that will be more abundant. This is because the American life consists of material prosperity as much as in civil liberties or political democracy is an old on as the content of the book suggests. However, since the structure of globalization has to be reconstructed while the greenhouse effect is being dealt with through the Kyoto protocol, the planet's air is being destroyed by carbon dioxide and other gases.
How cap and trade and carbon taxes ties up with greenhouse gases
Within society, the statements that are made by the government authorities are true because they are the power among the people, which gives them more control and the authority to define what needs to be done to the planet in order to save it from global warming.
The United States as a whole gets about half its electricity from coal, the most carbon-intense of fuels, and coal generation accounts for more than a third of its greenhouse gas emissions. So if the United States decided to get with the Kyoto program, it could comply just by replacing half its coal-fired plants with proven low-carbon sources like wind, natural gas and nuclear energy. A simple tax on carbon emissions or a national cap-and-trade system could get the job done (Clean Air, Murky Precedent).
By using this power, Gore and other political figures can have the upper hand on the global warming, which motivate people to take an active role in environment issues.From there, they can be aware of what is happening to the planet. It also points out that if a plan of action is not taking soon, the future for this planet is extremely bleak, which leaves nothing for future generations to build on or strive for.
At this point, it is apparent that Gore wanted to address global warming so that more people could be aware of the issue that destroying the earth on a daily basis to the point that as this essay is being written, the planet is being dissolved by unnatural affects. Therefore, the movie allows Gore present the issue of global warming in a way that is informative and less boring so that the audience will understand the issue needs to be addressed before it is too late, which would eliminate the future for future generations. Furthermore, if global warming and the affects of the greenhouse effects are not addressed properly within a timely manner, there will be no earth to save in the future, which leads to the end of the human race and God's earthly creatures.
When studying the greenhouse effects on the earth, people's thoughts on the environment must be understand in order to make a difference. From there, people must understand the effects of carbon dioxide so that we can have a future and if they do not, there will be no future to conserve.
As Americans, we can try to preserve the planet by understanding and taking care of it. If we do not understand it, we will not know how to take care of it, which will eventually kill everything on the planet. Furthermore, we need to support one another in order to overcome the environment issues. Support, as a construct, has been defined as a sense of belonging, specifically among peers, teammates, community or family members. People that are reporting strong social support/low isolation exhibit higher levels of resilience and lower levels of aggression, which allows to express themselves freely to help the planet. People are also less likely to be suicidal if they perceive their family, friends, and peers to be more accepting in their environment concern, and if they have more positive friendships, which can be reflected in a positive setting. Those who feel supported by counselors, parents, or peers exhibit healthier coping mechanisms and maintain a more positive outlook about their future with the environment
If people have socially supportive arrangements as the attributes of socially legitimate roles which provide for the meeting dependency needs without loss of esteem, they are less likely to show aggression while suppressing destructive behavior. From there, socially supportive environments were presented as pattern interpersonal relationships mediated through shared values and sentiments as well as facilitate the performance of social roles through which needs are met. In summation, social support has been defined as an intervening factor tied directly to the coping process, which helps them to want a cleaner environment will have a future (Pearson, 1986).
Political figures provided the institutional frameworks that permitted successive versions of all social classes of America, which the greenhouse effect need to be addressed so that we can live in a healthy environment.. Even though this has made things grow and flourish, globalization is a major issue concerning economic growth and the future of our planet.. Modern day political figures want to change the environment, however the answer is to create a new globalization structure as well taking control of carbon dioxide.
An Inconvenient Truth a Global Warning. 2006. 17 March 2008. http://www.climatecrisis.net/aboutthefilm/
Al Gore Sounds Global Warming Alert. 2006. 17 March 2008. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5441976
Stigliz, Joesph. Making Globalization Work. 8 March 2008. http://www.wwnorton.com/catalog/fall06/006122.htm
Making Globalization Work. 8 March 2008. http://www.amazon.com/Making-Globalization-Work-Joseph-Stiglitz/dp/0393061221
Lind, Michael. 2004. Are We still a middle-class nation. 8 March 2008. http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2004/are_we_still_a_middle_class_nation