The take by President George W. Bush on 31st May calling on 15 influential countries to agree by the end of 2008 on a long-term
goal to cut emissions, is a promising step to fronting
environmental catastropes.
Bush''s proposal is a strong statement about curbing climate-warming emissions after the international first phase of the Kyoto
Protocol ends in 2012.
America and Australia for the last years has been seen as one of the major countries who have signed the Protocol but not committed to ratify it.
Still there is a problem of some public policy experts who are skeptical of global warming and they see Kyoto as a scheme to either slow the growth of the world''s industrial democracies or to transfer wealth to the third world in what they claim is a global socialism initiative.
Others argue the Kyoto protocol does not go far enough to curb greenhouse emissions.
Some environmental economists are critical of the Protocol seeing the costs of the Protocol as outweighing the benefits, some believing the standards set by the protocol are optimistic, a highly inequitable and inefficient agreement which would do little to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Economists have been trying to analyze the overall net benefit of the Protocol through cost-benefit analysis.
As for the case of climatology, there is disagreement due to large uncertainties in economic variables.
Some estimates indicate either that observing the Protocol is more expensive than not observing the Protocol.
On the same note the Protocol is seen as having a marginal net benefit which exceeds the cost of simply adjusting to global warming.
However, a study in Nature found that "accounting only for local external costs, together with production costs, to identify energy strategies, compliance with the Kyoto Protocol would imply lower, not higher, overall costs. "
The recent "Copenhagen consensus" project found that the Kyoto Protocol would slow down the process of global warming, but have a superficial overall benefit.
Defenders of the Protocol argue that while the initial greenhouse gas cuts may have little effect, they set the political precedent for bigger and more effective cuts in the future.
Critics point out that additional higher curbs on carbon emission are likely to cause significantly higher increase in cost, making such defence moot.
Moreover, the precautionary principle could apply to any political, social, economic or environmental consequence, which might have equally devastating effect in terms of poverty and environment, making the precautionary argument irrelevant.
Copenhagen Consensus is a project that seeks to establish priorities for advancing global welfare using methodologies based on the theory of welfare economics, organized by Bjorn Lomborg, the author of " The Skeptical Environmentalist."
The British government sponsored report into the economic impacts of climate change known as "Stern Review" concluded that one percent of global GDP is required to be invested in order to mitigate the effects of climate change, and that failure to do so could risk a recession worth up to twenty percent of global
It should be noted, however, that the opposition is not unanimous, and that the inclusion of emissions trading has led some environmental economists to embrace the treaty.
Researcher''s reveals that carbon dioxide emissions from the use of carbon based fuels i.e. coal, oil and gas are significantly reduced with the hypothetical future economy of " low-carbon economy."
Such an economy is being envisaged by many states and organizations as a long-term necessity in order to mitigate the effects of global warming.
A low-carbon economy might be brought about through the use of energy conservation measures, and the substitution of renewable energy sources for fossil fuels.
Reducing carbon emission calls for technological imprents increases in the costs of carbon fuels, and the introduction of carbon trading or carbon taxes geared to change the efficiency ratio to favor a low-carbon economy.
What bather? Developing (third world) nations are not jointly participative in the summits of the G8. This gives no opportunity for these (third world) countries to truly present their ideas on reducing emissions. It''s seen to be a concern of only the "Big powers" hence little attention is extended for the common cause.
Despite all that, claustrophobia of global warming affects all, hence there is need to collectively adore to the set strategies while creating a friendly environment for all living creatures.