To be sure, the emerging industrial giants of China and India must find ways to control CO2 emissions. But let us not deflect discussion away from the fact that the US accounts for 40% of emissions worldwide.

America has led the way for being irresponsible in the area of global warming. As President Bush said, "Global Watrming is voodoo science!"

With mr. Bush leading the way of ignoracne, how can America blame anyone other than themselves, and not China, Brazil, India, and others for not fighting global warming.

America should be leading the way towards a conciencious attitude towards fighting global warming, not expecting other third world countries to lead the way in fighting global warming as the US is the biggest emitter of greenhouse gasses in the world, accoirding to this author.

The fact that China and India were not included in the list of "Annex I" countries that committed to quotas under the Kyoto Protocol is an artifact of the negotiation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The UNFCCC recognized that developing countries had contributed little to the buildup of greenhouse gases and exempted them from commitments. This may have been a strategic mistake, but it was a tactical necessity to get worldwide support for the UNFCCCC, signed by George H.W. Bush and ratified unanimously by the Senate.

Now most countries recognize that this exemption must end. The buildup of greenhouse gases by all countries is more rapid than anticipated, and China and India will be major contributors in the near future. Negotiations for the next commitment period, beyond the quotas set by Kyoto that end in 2012, will have to include commitments from all countries.

It is up to the most technically advanced societies--the US, Western Europe, Japan--to develop and make available at a reasonable price sustainable energy technology for the 'developing world.' Until we can offer alternatives, countries like China will burn their vast, high sulfur coal reserves and undertake environmentally damaging programs in an effort to catch up. What other choice do they have? If we expect these countries to become environmentally conscious, we must make first develop our own alternative energy technology and make it affordable not just in our own wealthy countries but in the most poverty-stricken areas. Only after having offered a real, viable alternative can we pass judgement. A mother in Calcutta has just as much right to hot water, electric lights, etc., as we do, and her government will do whatever it can to meet that demand within the contexts of its resources. Since no truly viable alternative seems in the works, we need to work on creating one before demanding for these countries to remain the Western world's plantations/sweat shops.

There is no question that the World is critically poised as Global Warming and deforestation begins to bite. Many, especially those with vested interests, will deny exactly what is taking place but the facts are clear. The momentum already in place is likely to engulf us - and then all the money in the World will not rectify matters!

It is time for the World's population to demand better but that is extremely hard if one spends all day foraging for a meal, a drop of water or fuel for cooking or warmth.

The biofuel stampede will be led by those keen to tap "the gold rush". They won't give a damn about people, what they wreck in the process, etc - these mean spirited loathesome creatures are a blight on our society. They offer nothing but "weasel words" as they grease palms in the halls of power.

It is time for those with courage and conviction to provide real leadership - few of those will be in political parties!

Dealing with global warming requires a unique human quality: the expression of concern and compassion for another human being even if such expression diminishes one's own personal gain. In other words, a compassionate person willingly makes personal sacrifices (by, for example, driving a gas-sipping economy car to minimize carbon emissions) in order to help the generations that are yet to be born. The full impact of global warming will be felt by future generations, not the current generation.

Therein lies the reason that the Chinese reject steps to protect the environment. The typical Chinese cares only for himself. Anyone else be damned.

You can see this selfish attitude in how the Chinese treat helpless North-Korean refugees. They hurt no one and are simply trying to escape poverty and growth-stunting hunger by transiting through China to reach sanctuary in the USA, Japan, or another democracy.

What do the Chinese do? They snatch the refugees and send them back to certain torture and death in North Korea. Few societies are as callous and morally bankrupt as Chinese society.

http://theclearsky.blogspot.com/#116274437809631696

Deforestation, global warming, rising energy prices, pollution are all manifestations of the bigger issue that nobody wants to talk about: over-population. We are a species of 6+ billion individuals. Even if the top 25% of the world's top resource consumers were to cut consumption, the remainder would still aspire to raise their level of consumption. We need to find a way of managing the world's population so that everyone can enjoy life, especially for children.

Using PPP, China has the 2nd largest GNP, India the 4th and Brazil the 10th. How in the world are they considered "developing nations" for this?

The US needs to take it's actions but not at the expense of allowing China, India and Brazil to replace in full any savings they make.

The producers of O2 should be compensated by the largest producers of CO2 for curbing deforestation and burning deforestation waste. If a minor tax were applied on global oils sales this fund could be allocated to these countries proportionately to the decrease of deforestation and especially forest fires to offset the resulting economic loss. Because CO2 from forest fires are so localized and concentrated they virtually saturate the forests absorption capacity.

I believe that it totaly right to stop the destruction of the rainforest. But that doesn´t make the brazilian climate diplomacy wrong.
If US, the world greatest polluter doesn´t compromisse, why should China, Brazil and India do?
In this case, I strongly believe that there is a moral reason for inaction.
Lack of political realism is the greatest problem towards global warming debate. Climate change economics requires a time horizon of centuries. It is not possible to expect politicians and public to act in exceptionally unrealistic way, imposing and bearing costs that would not deliver return until after they are dead.

I agree with the sentiment of the writer.But to worry about envoirment when we have millions to uplift from poverty is laughable.Specially when those who have now become rich by exploiting everybody's share of resources want to draw a line to keep others backward.Let Americans and others agree to stop buying crude oil and other expendable resources to per capita consumption level of India and China..then we will be ready to negotiate..until then.......all this is just pure talk