Student Publications
University of Houston
151C Communications Bldg
Houston, TX 77204-4015
713.743.5350

©1991-2007
Student Publications,
All rights reserved.

Last modified:

Contact:
ktruitt@uh.edu

Opinion

Kyoto treaty will choke economy

Jason Richardson
Opinion Columnist

Fans of the hit film The Day After Tomorrow have much to celebrate today, as the controversial Kyoto Climate Change Treaty became international law. The Kyoto Treaty formed as an international effort to combat global warming by forcing industrial nations to limit pollutants and other emissions that create greenhouse gasses. 

Russia made the treaty's passage possible by throwing in its support. The treaty's requirements for the reduction of energy use will affect many developed countries across the world, but exempts China, India and some 130 Third World nations. Over a billion people are exempted from the treaty, which calls its effectiveness into question.

The United States was not a signatory to the agreement, and the Bush Administration has refused to capitulate to the demands of international leaders who support the treaty. Bush has consistently opposed the treaty. In 2001, in an open letter to several U.S. Senators, President Bush said, "As you know, I oppose the Kyoto Protocol because it exempts 80 percent of the world, including major population centers such as China and India, from compliance and would cause serious harm to the U.S. economy. The Senate's vote, 95-0, shows that there is a clear consensus that the Kyoto Protocol is an unfair and ineffective means of addressing global climate change concerns."

The Bush Administration is rumored to be seeking alternatives to the Kyoto plan in an effort to shield American businesses from absorbing the brunt of the cost of cleaning the environment. A leading proposal is an emissions trading program that would involve Canada, the United States and Mexico.

At the center of the controversy is the validity of the global warming theory. In debate after debate, a battle of the experts ensues in which both sides make compelling arguments, but no side comes out objectively triumphant. Many critics of global warming studies have complained scientists who advocate the theory are merely promoting political agendas over truth in order to keep the grants coming in. In response, advocates of the theory claim its critics are too beholden to corporate interests.

Whatever the validity of the global warming theory may be, it has certainly become a religion many faithful have vowed to follow no matter what the true facts may show. Despite the lack of scientifically verifiable evidence to sustain the theory, many followers proselyte with missionary zeal in order to win favor for their beliefs. Michael Crichton captured this phenomenon beautifully in his newest novel State of Fear, in which he exposes the danger of devoting blind faith in a theory that may be incorrect.

The Kyoto regulations would be extremely costly for the United States to bear. Indeed, such a drag on the economy should have to be supported by the best caliber of scientifically verifiable evidence. Granted, the United States is the world's leading contributor to air pollution, but before instituting draconian measures to correct this imbalance, realistic goals should be set in place. 

The Kyoto protocols placed too heavy a burden on American businesses too quickly for it to be realistic. The world definitely needs the United States to institute widespread pollution controls, but the environmental controls should be realistic and incremental in order to accomplish long-term success without causing irrevocable harm to the economy.

Richardson, an opinion columnist for The Daily Cougar,
can be reached at jasonuhlaw@hotmail.com