Why did the Kyoto protocol fail?

Answer 1

the Kyoto agreement or protocol is a non-binding agreement under which countries will reduce their carbon missions by a certain percent. Although, the Protocol was signed by many nations, each individual country must ratify it within their own governments to make this agreement binding. The US was one of such countries that failed to ratify this agreement when brought to Congress.

the good thing about the agreement is that it is protected countries from muting to much carbon into the air causing global warming and destroying the ozone layer and it provides expiation's for 3rd world countries and developing nations.

the worst hooting about the agreement is to make energy more expensive and dictators more wealthy then the coyote protocol has seceded brilliants. all coyote would do is create restrictions our government shouldn't Reich resulting in higher taxes inflation and apolitical unrest and socialism.

hope it helps it did for my debate at school! =special ED

Answer 2

There are no good reasons for not signing the Kyoto Protocol although by now, with its operating period almost finished, it would only be a symbolic gesture.

A possible reason for not signing or ratifying the Protocol is political advantage. It is always easier to appear populist by opposing a measure that people do not fully understand and which some fear will cost them money.

Another reason would be the genuine belief that global warming is beyond our control. For senior politicians to hold such a belief would be a pity, given all the sound scientific advice available, yet this is certainly possible.

A:

The most popular reason is that many do not believe that the Kyoto Protocol will reduce CO2 at all. It only calls for requested limits by some countries. Other countries that are signers can increase their CO2 levels at will. Even the developed countries that are requested to reduce are able to increase their CO2 levels by purchasing credits from other countries.

A:

Although Global Warming is heavily supported, there is still debate over whether it really is a problem which can be solved by cutting down on emissions.

Answer 3

• Without the United States in the Kyoto Protocol, the problem of emissions can't be addressed seriously.
• What is needed is a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without a heavy cost in economic development and jobs.
• Kyoto Protocol targets must be more realistic and achievable.
• Greenhouse gas emission targets should recognize a nation's special circumstances, for example whether it has a resource-based economy like Canada, its temperature, and distance between urban centres.
• Greenhouse gas emission targets should be mandatory for developing countries as well as for industrialized countries or all targets should be voluntary.

· Causes animosity between nations who want to join and ones that don't.

Economic: pumping less pollutants into the air costs money! Nations will have to produce less, or find more expensive ways to make factories etc. ecologically friendly. Job loss may occur as well.

Answer 4

One criticism is that the agreements do not go far enough.

Another criticism is that they are not binding

A further criticism is that developing countries such as China and India are exempt from the protocal, although China is actually making considerable progress in minimising its carbon emissions.

The number one criticism most groups have against the Kyoto Protocol is that it allows doubling of emissions by almost every signing country. With a few notable exceptions, signing countries are allowed to increase their CO2 production at will. China, which already produces 27% of all CO2 , will be allowed to increase their production to whatever they desire over the next twenty years. India and other "developing" countries will be able to do likewise.

The handful of countries that are ASKED to try to reduce, will not be required to provide any actual savings either. Any country that wishes to exceed these limits will be allowed to purchase the CO2 from other countries.

This makes the Kyoto Protocol agreement nothing more then political rhetoric and a method of transferring billions to developing countries while allowing unmitigated increases in CO2.

Answer 5

The Kyoto Protocol failed to effectively address climate change for a few reasons. One key factor was the lack of participation from major emitters like the United States and China, which limited its global impact. Additionally, the protocol's voluntary targets and lack of enforcement mechanisms led to insufficient reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Answer 6

It didn't fail. It is still working.

Answer 7

help me pls