The Pros And Cons Of The Kyoto Protocol

On November 12, 1998, during the reign of the Clinton administration, the US signed the Kyoto Protocol and would enter into force on the ninetieth day after at least 55 Parties to the Convention had submitted their ratification, approval, acceptance, or accession. This signatory is a strange contradiction to the landslide vote of the Byrd-Hagel Resolution of 1997, which states: "the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol, or other agreement regarding, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992...". Although we must also understand that a signatory doesn't actually commit a Party to an agreement/protocol unless ratified. This Resolution additionally claims that the ratification of any such agreement/protocol

After the election of President George W. Bush, the US withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol on March 28, 2001, even though the Bush administration claimed to take climate change seriously. Their strong opposition to the Kyoto treaty was because it exempted the 80 percent of the world that was mainly developing countries, including major population centers such as China and India. Since the Kyoto Protocol's objective was to target industrialized nations, developing nations were advised to voluntarily comply to implementing the Kyoto standards, but were never the main targets. Bush's decision to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol ignited the opinions of many environmental groups and world leaders, expressing their concern and disappointment to his decision. In a frugal attempt to rebuttal the mounting worldwide disapproval, Bush claimed that he was only facing the reality of the severe energy problem in the US and that the Kyoto Protocol had the potential to uproot the US economy. Tyndall Centre10 not only called Bush's claim an understatement but implied that the reality of the policy reversal was

It only seems visionary that one of the largest GHG emitters leads by example. The nationally determined contribution for the US was to cut our emissions by 28 percent by 2025 compared to our 2005 levels. Once the agreement comes into force, countries that are committed to the agreement will aspire to maintain temperatures below 1,5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Under President Trump's policies, this goal has been rendered to damnation and he continues to plan withdrawment from the agreement as soon as possible. Our President has forgotten his people, his morals, and perhaps his graduate's degree from Penn State, this action will not "protect Americans", in fact, it will be too late to fix our mistakes after the next presidential election occurs. Trump argued that the Paris Agreement undermined the US economy, put us at a disadvantage and the withdrawal would be in accordance with his America First Policy. Trump also reasoned that sending $100 billion a year in aid alone to poorer countries (by 2020) was deplorable, even though we have restricted their economies to mere nutshells and have severely put a disadvantage to any of their defense system against the impacts of climate change. His decisions would be different if he knew that our oceans already hold 35 percent