What do you think are the prospects for reducing global climate-changing emissions? Be sure to address these points:
To what extent can this be done without harming global economic welfare?
What are the implications for demand-side economics of reducing climate-changing emissions?
Why are some countries reluctant to adopt carbon emissions targets?
Please use the attached link to help in answering the questions:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 10:13 am ad1c9bdddf
There are good prospects for reducing climate-changing emissions. This can be done without harming global economic welfare. Policy makers should not pass strong policies in times of economic hardship. Also, such decisions should not be taken that harm marginalized communities. Most important, fundamental economic and social changes should be undertaken to halt global climate change. Any initiative for reducing climate changing emissions should take into account economic mitigation potential. This takes into account social costs and benefits and social discount rates, assuming that market efficiency is increased by policies and measured and barriers are removed. The economic mitigation potential is usually greater than the market mitigation potential. There is economic potential for the mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions over the coming decades. Countries can ensure healthy economic development, improve energy security, and reduce climate risks through collaborative governance on economic, energy, and environmental goals. In several countries, targets for reducing coal and limiting greenhouse gas emissions can also help promoted technological innovations and improvements in resource productivity. The opinion is that there is no need to choose between fighting climate change and growing ...
This solution explains prospects for reducing global climate-changing emissions. The sources used are also included in the solution.
Climate Change/Greenhouse Gases
The developed country Parties...shall adopt national policies and take corresponding measures on the mitigation of climate change, by limiting its anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and protecting and enhancing its greenhouse gas sinks and reservoirs. These policies and measures will demonstrate that developed countries are taking the lead in modifying longer-term trends in anthropogenic emissions consistent with the objective of the Convention, recognizing that the return by the end of the present decade to earlier levels of anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol would contribute to such modification, and taking into account the differences in these Parties' starting points and approaches, economic structures and resource bases, the need to maintain strong and sustainable economic growth, available technologies and other individual circumstances, as well as the need for equitable and appropriate contributions by each of these Parties to the global effort regarding that objective.
Is it proper to place the burden for the reduction of greenhouse gases on the developed nations, considering that some of the worst examples of deforestation and air pollution are occurring in developing nations?
I am looking for guidance on this question as I feel it is somewhat of a two sided question. It is stated that the United States emits is the number one contributor of greenhouse gases throughout the world. And industrialized or developed nations have caused the climate changes which are currently being seen today. As developing nations currently emit far less greenhouse gases than any developed nation. Thus, it should be the responsibility of these nations for reduction. However, some feel that within the next decade developing nations emission of greenhouse gases will far exceed that of any industrialized nation but they are unfortunately exempt from any new commitment within the Kyoto Protocol. Take China for example - they are felt to be the second largest emitter of greenhouse gases due to their robust economy and industrialization. However, they are exempt under the Kyoto Protocol as they are considered a developing nation and these nations were made exempt because increasing their usage or energy was essential to economic development. So this leads one to again ask if it is proper to place the burden for the reduction of greenhouse gases on the developed nations, considering that some of the worst examples of deforestation and air pollution are occurring in developing nations? Fair - I would say no as some areas such as Brazil and China are large contributors but then you have areas such as Africa which are not but still are reaping the effects from the industrialized nations. So I thought I would turn to this site for an opinion as I am somewhat on the fence. As I feel that it in turn should be the responsibility of the developed nations as they have contributed to the climate changes we are experiencing today and they have the means and ability for these changes. Also they should be made to prevent further changes and emissions. However, when should the developing countries be made to step up and change their ways as they after all are contributing and should change or alter their ways or it will be a never ending cycle so to speak.View Full Posting Details