ethics
05-06-2003, 10:08 PM
The European Environment Agency (EEA) estimates they were 1% greater than in 2000.
The EU as a whole is committed to reducing emissions by 8% on their 1990 levels by between 2008 and 2012.
On present trends, it appears to stand almost no chance of keeping its promise.
The 8% cut is the commitment made by the EU under the terms of the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement on tackling climate change.
BBC Story Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2996219.stm)
There were MANY things wrong with the Kyoto agreement, there were too many punishing clauses for those that participated and nothing for those that didn't. In other words, there was very little, if any, materialistic incentive (Let's face it, any country needs that before signing anything of that proportion).
To see EU failing, pretty bad as well, is to say that Bush was right from the onset? Or is this a minor glitch in to a final goal?
The EU as a whole is committed to reducing emissions by 8% on their 1990 levels by between 2008 and 2012.
On present trends, it appears to stand almost no chance of keeping its promise.
The 8% cut is the commitment made by the EU under the terms of the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement on tackling climate change.
BBC Story Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2996219.stm)
There were MANY things wrong with the Kyoto agreement, there were too many punishing clauses for those that participated and nothing for those that didn't. In other words, there was very little, if any, materialistic incentive (Let's face it, any country needs that before signing anything of that proportion).
To see EU failing, pretty bad as well, is to say that Bush was right from the onset? Or is this a minor glitch in to a final goal?