The Kyoto Accord, Global Warming, and the United States

One of the most controversial current international issues is that of the Kyoto Accord, negotiated and opened for signature during the close of the 20th century in Japan. Focusing on negative climate change since the industrial revolution, the treaty seeks to decrease overall greenhouse gas emissions among signatory nations. Currently with 164 participating countries, the treaty primarily seeks to set limitations for emissions of carbon dioxide, or CO2, as well as five other greenhouse gases. One of the most noticeable problems still remaining with the treaty is the fact that two major players, the United States of America and Australia, have both refused to ratify the treaty, and are expected to hold their stance for the foreseeable near future.

The primary reason behind the formation of the Kyoto Accord are global fears over global warming, a trend which many see exemplified by a possible increase in the average number of natural disasters believed to be attributable to an increase in air or water temperature. For example, much media speculation has been released over the increase in the number and intensity of hurricanes over the last century. Although it is widely understood that hurricane and climate activity will naturally waver, "The natural fluctuation between these phases [warmer and colder] seems to be intensified by a superimposed long-term warming process so that sea surface temperature and the level of hurricane activity increase from warm phase to warm phase. The increase in the number of strong hurricanes per year from 2.6 to 4.1 from the previous warm phase to the current warm phase means an increase of 58 percent" (Lovgren). Another such natural phenomena that, although naturally accepted to fluctuate based on global climate patterns over centuries or even millennia seems to be acting out of the ordinary, is that of the recent rise in overall glacial melt. Photo documented examples of glaciers that have receded over the past 50 to 100 years or more are widely available, such as the Breidamerkurjökull in Iceland, which since 1973 has receded 1300 meters according to ground measurements, and over 1440 meters according to satellite readings (NASA). This corresponds to a 2 kilometer recession in a period of only 27 years, which is quite shocking. Obviously, accelerated glacial melting seems to correspond with in increase in temperatures of some sort, the question being whether it is permanent and/or caused significantly by humans.

Although the movement of glaciers over time is obviously a natural occurrence, as anyone can conjure up images in their mind of the massive glaciers covering the earth in movies such as "Ice Age," the fear of many activist groups focuses on the alarming recent increases in the speed of this glacial retreat. There are many possible consequences to this aspect of global warming, one of the foremost being rising sea levels, which have been reported to have risen 4 to 8 inches over the last century (Lovgren). One of the first victims of this rising sea level are the townsfolk on the South Pacific island of Tegua, in an area where the effects of climate change can be seen in many of the local islands as increasing numbers of floods and rising sea levels (Brown). Also, a potential danger to many of the places that are reliant upon the runoff created by melting glaciers during the warmer summer months, where, if things go as they are, runoff will soon be substantially decreased or possibly eliminated altogether. "A reduction in runoff will affect the ability to irrigate crops and will reduce summer stream flows necessary to keep dams and reservoirs replenished" (Lovgren). In addition, "Many species of freshwater and saltwater plants and animals are dependent on glacier-fed waters to ensure the cold water habitat to which they have adapted. Some species of freshwater fish need cold water to survive and to reproduce, and this is especially true with salmon and cutthroat trout" (Glacier Wiki).

Ultimately, the goals of the Kyoto accord are to stunt the increase in emissions of greenhouse gases, especially CO2, which are attributed as being the primary factor in global warming due to the greenhouse effect. Although CO2 levels have regularly wavered between about 180 ppm and 270 ppm over the last 800,000 years, likely in direct relation to the ice ages present every 100,000 years or so, they have shot up to over 375 ppm now. "Because it is a greenhouse gas, elevated CO2 levels will increase global mean temperature. Quantitative understanding of climate sensitivity to CO2 concentration remains elusive due to uncertainties in a variety of feedbacks, especially those related to clouds, but there is little doubt that a substantial portion of the warming in the last half century was caused by the increase in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere" (Greenhouse Wiki) One frightening (however unlikely for Earth) example of an overly carbon dioxide rich atmosphere is available just by looking at Venus, whose surface temperature is hot enough to melt lead. Obviously, the Kyoto agreement seeks to reduce the current trend of greenhouse gases by seeking to "reduce emissions to 5.2 percent below their 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012" in the top 35 industrialized countries, targeting primarily carbon dioxide levels" (China).

Although there is obviously a direct relation between the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and temperature, the Kyoto agreement is not necessarily the best way to deal with it. While the agreement effectively halts the increase of emissions in highly developed countries, it encourages emissions growth in developing countries by creating a market of "emissions credits" in which third-world countries get paid by developed countries for being technologically behind and having no emissions regulations to worry about. As stated by Cecil Adams, "Even if all Kyoto targets are met, world carbon emissions will continue to rise. Why? Because Kyoto exempts developing nations, and increased carbon emissions in those countries will swamp any reductions the developed world achieves" (Adams). This is actually one of the top reasons that America sees no point in joining the accord; it, in effect, does little to help emissions rates, while focusing more on stunting economic growth in first-world countries to help third-world countries catch up. It is ironic how countries such as China critique the United States energy policy, while the Bush administration has set a resolve for an 18 percent reduction in the U.S. growth rate of greenhouse gases by 2012 as well as putting $5 billion a year towards the science and technology needed to help combat climate change (China). Incidentally, this leads to America's next argument - that the treaty is unfair towards certain counties. Most obviously, China and India will be placed with no mandatory emission caps, or, in other words, nothing to keep them from putting their economic development on overdrive, while Kyoto would cost the U.S. economy $400 billion and almost 5 million jobs (China). As Cecil Adams puts it, "Is the solution, then, to rein in the developing nations? Hardly. While we can advise countries such as China and India on ways to use energy more efficiently, we can't seriously expect them to halt their efforts to achieve the prosperity we already have - and make no mistake, it's precisely those efforts that are driving up carbon emissions" (Adams). Overall, despite the fact that it may as well be worth it to the United States to simply join the Kyoto Accord in an effort to regain a bit of its lost world popularity, there is simply no point in doing so when it comes to worldwide emissions.

One important fact to note in regards to the issue of glacial retreat is history over the past few hundred years of glacial patterns. During the "Little Ice Age" between 1550 to 1850 glaciers were strong and the earth experienced a period of relative cool temperatures, but they began to retreat beginning around the start of the industrial revolution up to about 1940, during which 90 percent of the 1 degree gain in urban warming occurred. Little known as well is the fact that the next period, between 1940 and 1980, another slight cooling took place during which glaciers in general began to take back ground. It must also be remembered that "Ice core samples from the Arctic, for example, show an 18ºF temperature variation during the last 160,000 years" (Holcberg). If there is an 18 degree difference in temperature between ice ages, would that not suggest that our current "global warming" of a single degree is simply a small showing of progress out of our latest ice age 10,000 years ago, or even the "mini" one a few hundred years ago? And finally, wouldn't the fact that carbon dioxide emissions by humans make up less than 5 percent of the current carbon cycle even today show that it is effectively impossible for humans to have made up such a large portion of the current high CO2 levels (Carbon Cycle)? Conclusively, it is imperative that more research be done to explicitly prove the relationship between CO2 levels and temperature rise, and a few minor yet important changes be made to the Kyoto Accord to make it more fair to countries with too much to risk in terms of unstable economies, unemployment levels, and economic growth.

Works Cited:
Adams, Cecil. "Is global warming for real?" April 30th, 2006.
< http://www.straightdope.com/columns/060407.html >
Brown, Lester. "Rising Sea Level Forcing Evacuation of Island Country" Nov. 20, 2001

"China Urges U.S. to Sign Kyoto Protocol". Associated Press. December 1st, 2005.

"Greenhouse Effect". Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Sept. 9th, 2006.

Holcberg, David "Are the Media Giving You the Whole Story on Global Warming?"
Capitalism Magazine. Nov. 1, 2002

Lovgren, Stefan. "Warming to Cause Catastrophic Rise in Sea Level?"
National Geographic News. April 26, 2004.

"Receding Glacier in Iceland". Visible Earth, NASA. June 08, 2006
"The Greenhouse Effect and the Carbon Cycle". Center for Climatic Research.