One of the interesting topics included on the movie was the kyoto protocol. Kyoto protocol must be fully understand by every citizens in order to contribute their part in saving the earth from global warming.Yes! I said to save the earth from global warming. Because I was really convinced by the movie, that We are now facing a dilemma of global warming. Each important factors were stated clearly for every one to understand the situation of the earth. Even a student may understand the concept of global warming because the explanation was simplified and guided with cartoon characters.
What most part that made the movie exceptional from other is that. It does not focused on the cause of global warming and does not end with the reason why such dilemma like that occur on our planet. The topic continues to discuss about the ways on how we can save the earth from global warming.
The narrator actor played his role naturally as if just like a friend is telling a story about global warming and its effect. Although the movie took more hours it stays the interest of the viewers. And it also applied to the true to life situations that’s why we have to pix our eyes when watching.
From the movie I am now more aware about the kyoto protocol. Where in all know before is, it is an international framework on climate change with the objective of reducing Greenhouse gasses that cause climate change. Kyoto protocol was named after the place Kyoto Japan where the treaty met. It was agreed on December 1997, and entered into forced on February 2005.
Well as of November 2007, 174 parties have ratified the protocol. Of these, 36 developed countries (plus EU as a party in its own right) are required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the level specified for each of them in the treaty. One Hundred Thirty-seven (137) developing countries have ratified the protocol, including Brazil, China and India, but have no obligation on beyond monitoring and reporting emissions.
The United States being one of the highest contributor of carbon emission, although a signatory to the kyoto protocol, has neither ratified nor withdrawn from the Protocol. They are the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels. The senators of the U.S decided not to participate because it would result to serious harm economy of U.S. But the big issue there was the signing of Clinton Administration lead by Vice President Al Gore and Senator Joseph Lieberman.
But when President George Bush lead the country he questioned the rules of treaty. He was doubt on the intention of exemption in kyoto. The exemption which was given to Japan and India which is the second largest contributor of greenhouse gasses. Instead they agreed on Asia Pacific Partnership on clean Development and Climate. Where in the program’s concern is promoting clean environment with out harming the economy. Slowly as of December 2007, many cities f U.S. agreed on the protocol.
• Large participating cities: Albany, New York; Albuquerque, New Mexico;Alexandria, Virginia; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Arlington, Texas; Atlanta, Georgia; Austin, Texas; Baltimore, Maryland; Berkeley, California; Boston, Massachusetts; Charleston, South Carolina;Chattanooga, Tennessee; Chicago, Illinois; Cincinnati, Ohio; Columbus, Ohio;Dallas, Texas; Denver, Colorado; Des Moines, Iowa; Fairfield, Connecticut; Fayetteville, Arkansas; Hartford, Connecticut; Honolulu, Hawaii; Indianapolis, Indiana; Jersey City, New Jersey; Lansing, Michigan; Las Vegas, Nevada; Lawrence, Kansas; Lexington, Kentucky; Lincoln, Nebraska; Little Rock, Arkansas; Los Angeles, California; Louisville, Kentucky; Madison, Wisconsin; Miami, Florida; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Nashville, Tennessee; New Orleans, Louisiana; New York, New York; Oakland, California; Omaha, Nebraska; Pasadena, California; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Phoenix, Arizona; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Portland, Oregon; Providence, Rhode Island; Richmond, Virginia; Sacramento, California; Salt Lake City, Utah; San Antonio, Texas; San Francisco, California; San Jose, California; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Seattle, Washington; Sioux City, Iowa; St. Louis, Missouri; Tacoma, Washington; Tallahassee, Florida; Tampa, Florida; Topeka, Kansas; Tulsa, Oklahoma; Vancouver, Washington; Virginia Beach, Virginia; Washington, D.C.; West Palm Beach, Florida; Wilmington, North Carolina.
List of cities was intentionally attached to see full details of the cities and mayors.
Kyoto Protocol state that reducing these emissions is crucially important as carbon dioxide is causing the earth’s atmosphere to heat up. Many environmentalist, analysis and forums supported the Kyoto nowadays even a group of students “Kyoto Now”.
Some public policy experts who are skeptical of global warming 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 protocol does not go far enough to curb greenhouse emissions (Niue, The Cook Islands, and Nauru added notes to this effect when signing the protocol).
Some environmental economists have been critical of the Kyoto Protocol. Many see the costs of the Kyoto Protocol as outweighing the benefits, some believing the standards which Kyoto sets to be too optimistic, others seeing a highly inequitable and inefficient agreement which would do little to curb greenhouse gas emissions.[84] It should be noted, however, that this opposition is not unanimous, and that the inclusion of emissions trading has led some environmental economists to embrace the treaty.
Further, there is controversy surrounding the use of 1990 as a base year, as well as not using per capita emissions as a basis. Countries had different achievements in energy efficiency in 1990. For example, the former Soviet Union and eastern European countries did little to tackle the problem and their energy efficiency was at its worst level in 1990; the year just before their communist regimes fell. On the other hand, Japan, as a big importer of natural resources, had to improve its efficiency after the 1973 oil crisis and its emissions level in 1990 was better than most developed countries. However, such efforts were set aside, and the inactivity of the former Soviet Union was overlooked and could even generate big income due to the emission trade.
There is an argument that the use of per capita emissions as a basis in the following Kyoto-type treaties can reduce the sense of inequality among developed and developing countries alike, as it can reveal inactivities and responsibilities among countries.
Thus Global warming theory rests on three cornerstones: climate models, scientific analyses of past and present climate data and trends, and the assertion that increases in greenhouse gases drive up global temperatures. However, recent scientific discoveries are chipping away at these cornerstones.
“Temperature Trends And Climate Models Match”.
The increase in the earth's surface temperature during the past 150 years is far less than the best climate models predicted.
Based on models, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicted in 1990 that if no further action were taken to curb greenhouse gas emissions, we could expect an increase in temperature between 4.5 degrees and 6.0 degrees Celsius by 2050. In 1996 a new IPCC prediction was for an increase of 0.8 degrees to 3.5 degrees Celsius by 2100 - less than half the warming in twice the time. A U.S. government survey of the global climate model literature conducted predicted even less warming - between 0.5 degrees and 2.0 degrees Celsius by 2100. With every new report the range of warming falls, which implies that the early models on which the most catastrophic claims were based were crude predictors of global climate change.
“Natural Climate Change Takes Thousands of Years”.
Environmentalists have argued that the slight surface warming of just over 1 degree Fahrenheit the earth has experienced since the mid-1800s must be the result of human activities, since natural temperature changes this substantial occur over hundreds or even thousands of years. But a study published in the October 2, 1998, issue of Science showed that around 12,500 years ago global temperature rose by more than 20 degrees Fahrenheit in approximately 50 years. This natural change was more than 10 times the "catastrophic" warming environmentalists’ claim humans are causing - and it occurred in half the time. The finding confirms that global climate can change dramatically within a very short period and can do so absent human influence.
“Increased CO2 Emissions, Primarily From The United States, Are Responsible For Current Surface Warming”
Environmentalists also have argued that since the United States is the largest emitter of CO2, the greenhouse gas of primary concern, it should take the lead in reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Unfortunately for their argument, it turns out that the U.S. is in fact a leading "air filter." According to an October 16, 1998, article in Science, North America removes more carbon (about 2 billion tons) from the atmosphere than it emits (1.5 billion tons) each year. One reason is the tremendous regrowth in the eastern U.S. of forests that act as carbon sinks, removing CO2 from the atmosphere.
Even more damaging to the environmentalists' argument is the fact that most of the warming over the last century occurred before 1940 - preceding the vast majority of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions worldwide. Global warming alarmists have been unable to explain this
