[typoon]

For all those who are critical of the US for not ratifying it. Looks like Russia isn't either because it will stifle economic growth.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,104561,00.html

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by typoon:
For all those who are critical of the US for not ratifying it. Looks like Russia isn't either because it will stifle economic growth.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,104561,00.html

this isn't one of my pet issues, but I imagine those who are concerned about this will not consider Russia's rejection as an argument for saying its ok for US to reject it.

I've always found that a bizarre justification or defense. "This other did just as bad, therefore its ok for us to do bad".

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
this isn't one of my pet issues, but I imagine those who are concerned about this will not consider Russia's rejection as an argument for saying its ok for US to reject it.

I've always found that a bizarre justification or defense. "This other did just as bad, therefore its ok for us to do bad".

Troll can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that Russia's decision means that Kyoto will not now come into force. In that respect, it is certainly an important decision.

From my perspective, the problem with Kyoto is principally that the perception of political need (we have to have a treaty by X date) got ahead of the countries whose support it needed.

Traditionally, treaties aren't signed until all the members agree on the text. When you do that, ratification is rarely a problem. But when (as with Kyoto) you tell people that they have to sign a treaty that isn't fully agreed-upon because of an artificial political timetable, you create a political backlash.

Perhaps if people had been a little more patient and flexible, there could have been an agreement. For example, did you know that the US is a party to the International Framework Convention on Climate Change? It's not mentioned much, but it is true. Given that the Framework Convention is up and running it is still possible for countries to work together. But any future agreements will have to be smarter than the Kyoto sledgehammer.

[AutoJC]

Russia not going to Ratify Kyoto

Good for Russia!

[AutoJC]

Besides, which, the findings of the Kyoto Convention are inconclusive to global warming and are a total sham

[voodoo]

Does it stand for Jesus Christ?

[voodoo]

The Jay Cee that is JC.

[tie]

Originally posted by typoon:
For all those who are critical of the US for not ratifying it. Looks like Russia isn't either because it will stifle economic growth.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,104561,00.html

For those who pay too much attention to Fox News ():

The possibility remains that the statement on Tuesday by the Russian official, Andrei N. Illarionov, the top economic adviser to President Vladimir V. Putin, was just a negotiating ploy, aimed at extracting as many concessions as possible from the European Union and Japan, the treaty's main supporters.

On Wednesday a lower-level official, Mukhamed M. Tsikanov, a deputy economics minister, sounded a note of hope for the treaty, declaring, "There are no decisions about ratification apart from the fact that we are moving toward ratification." Mr. Putin, meanwhile, remained silent. (link)

Given that Russia's economic output dropped like a stone in the 90s, Kyoto wouldn't place limits on its economy. Instead, Russia would be profiting off emissions credits. I'm not sure why Russia wouldn't ratify Kyoto, but I guess we'll see.

[tie]

Oops, I hate to bring up old news..

"Russian Government Backs U.N. Accord on Global Warming"

NY Times

After years of unusually public infighting, the Russian cabinet approved the Kyoto Protocol on global warming today and prepared to send it to parliament, where its expected approval would allow the long-delayed climate change treaty to come into force around the world.

Bush has flipped and flopped on this issue for four years, but it looks like Kyoto will be coming into force despite US non-leadership. (But read the last few paragraphs of the article, too.)