As the issue of global climate change comes to the fore in international discussions, and as countries attempt to find solutions for climate change, attention frequently turns to the Kyoto Protocols. By June of 2007, 172 countries had signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocols. Notably absent from the list of countries ratifying the Protocols are the United States and Australia, both of which have explicitly stated that they will not ratify the Protocols. Although some environmentalists argue that the United States should ratify, the United States is correct to refuse to ratify the Protocols. The Kyoto Protocols, although well intentioned, are doomed to fail. An analysis of them indicates that they are simply ineffective. Although countries that ratify the Kyoto Protocols agree to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to pre-1990 levels, only 35 countries have agreed to cap their greenhouse gas emissions. Agreeing to a cap is not part of the treaty. Also, the Protocols exempt developing nations, and instead require developed nations to limit their greenhouse gas emissions. By not requiring developing countries to limit their emissions, those who created the treaty have permitted these countries to continue to pollute at high volumes, thus offsetting any of the efforts taken by developed countries. What further makes the Kyoto Protocols ineffective is that not only are developing countries excluded but China is counted as a developing country. By not having to reduce its emissions, China will continue to pollute in large quantities, preventing any hope of curbing global emissions. In addition, it is unfair that China and other developing countries can pollute at will, thus avoiding engaging in costly emissionreduction strategies. The ability to avoid paying to reduce emissions gives China an unfair advantage on the global market, as it can produce and sell products cheaper than developed countries that need to pay for emissions-reducing technology. There is another irony in the Kyoto Protocols that China helps to exemplify. If developed nations lower their demand for fossil fuels in an attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, this reduction will lower the price of fossil fuels. As fossil fuels become cheaper, developing countries, especially China, will increase their use of cheap fossil fuels, which will produce even more greenhouse gases. Exempting China means the Protocols cannot work. Finally, to ratify the Kyoto Protocols would be equivalent to the United States’ harming its own interests. Were the United States to attempt to comply with the Protocols, it would cost the U.S. economy $400 billion, as well as close to 5 million jobs, according to President Bush. Instead of ratifying an ineffective treaty that will harm the United States’ interests, the United States should continue with its current efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The United States has signed treaties with other countries regarding strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as engaged in domestic efforts to limit emissions. The United States’ current efforts are more than enough to try to address the problem of global climate change, thus making ratifying the Kyoto Protocols wholly unnecessary.
1. What are the issue and conclusion in this essay?
2. Does the argument contain significant ambiguity in the reasoning? Clue: What word or phrases could have multiple meanings?
3. Ask and answer the critical thinking question that you believe reveals the main problem with the author’s reasoning in this essay. Explain why the question you asked is particularly harmful to the author’s argument.
4. Write an essay from the viewpoint of someone who holds a different opinion from that of the essay author. Clue: What other ethical norms could influence an opinion about this issue?