Quote:
Originally Posted by stickyfingerz
How bout if you are going to post in support of your side you dabble into providing a few rock solid facts that support global warming.  |
OK... got a moment. First, there is no "side" - it's not a debate, tho small elements can be good or bad, tho don't have enough impact worth discussing. This is also not a subject that can be covered on a chatboard so will keep it simple.
There are two elements associated with... basically pollution. First is a growing lack of resources - and an element of destruction of existing resources. Second is in increasing demand on these resources where world population is increasing X fold.
A simple example is a cup filled 25% with water and represents the current world population. For example sake, assume world population doubles every 20 years. How long before that cup overflows and unstainability starts?
It's basically about lack of resources and pressure being placed on these resources. Some resources can be "manufactured" or regenerated - such as water, but at a high cost. Water will be the oil of the future.
Resources range from ... literally everything, from air to water and have an effect on existing species in the process.
Some nations, such as China are the problem of the future. The Chinese govt is well-aware of this growing problem and actively seeking avenues to contain it - but, other pressures (economic) will prob supercede their intentions. The current problem is most likely the US which is home to only 5% of the world's population, yet consumes 25% of world resources. This is obviously unsustainable (as is the fiscal policy).
Call it what you will - "global warming", "unsustainability", "lack of resources" - it's the same thing - perhaps expressed in different terms.
Whether we like it or not, there will be little choice but to address the issue - and this needs attention on a global basis. The introduction of Kyoto is a step, but only a first stage - it will take far more effort.
Was speaking with a group of people who specialize in "resource management" recently and they forecast the introduction of "oxygen shares" on the markets within 10 years. The current scenario in managing "oxygen" under Kyoto makes it hard for govts to trade in these and offset their "oxygen quotas". Stuffing them on to the markets simplifies the process. Two guys already had orders for.. can't remember, something like 5 million of these shares. Their problem was they can't find enough land which ommitted oxygen levels to qualify (involves around one hectare of land per share).
Last month 180 nations met to continue negotiating deeper cuts under the Kyoto Protocol but excluding developing nations - for the moment. The US rejects the Protocol and complains about developing nations and that this will damage the US economy. However, thats only delaying the inevitable - there will be more than just economies damaged (including the US economy) unless this issue is addressed. There are other quibbles from a variety of nations where economic impact is a concern. Other nations object strongly to their resources being raped by others - so, it's going to be a negotiating process all round. When Kyoto expires, nations not in the "club" will prob suffer some degree of impact looking forward.