Is facing global warming expensive?

The maddening answer is yes, it would cost an incredible amount of effort and money to invest in this issue. This video makes an economic analysis of the most serious problems of humanity.

Surprisingly, global warming would be the most inefficient way of doing good to the world. I appreciate the economic focus of this speech, but I also hold a strong clash with his arguments.

Is it impossible to solve all the problems at the same time? It seems that our capability to change the world is limited by the amount of money available. From my point of view, and in contradiction with the best economists in the world, reducing emissions should be among the first things to take into account. I’m not talking about spending correctly, but making profit out of it.

Saving energy of all kinds by promoting efficiency at home, car, industry and many other polluters’ consumption, would involve a huge amount of savings, that could be spent in such other critical problems mentioned in the video.

All in all, kyoto protocol talks about a change in our conception of our surroundings. Mankind must take care of itself, and what a better thing to do it  than facing HIV, malaria and so on, with all the resources available. Kyoto protocol should be seen as a tool to stop global warming, but also as a way of avoiding wasting resources, in order to make other things that are really worth the effort.


Our biggest enemy is us

Human kind has inhabitted Earth for thousands of years but until industralisation both, nature and mankind, have lived in perfect armony. Since then, we have enslaved the enviroment and exploited it. Now, we pay the price for our selfishness and we seek for redemption by creating conventions such as environmental awareness. However, the damage is already done, but this doesn’t mean we should ignore it, it means we have to work harder to make The World a kind of heritage for future generations, and that is what The Kyoto Protocol is about.

To get started, we marked ourselves some objectives:

  • Every government should undertake to reduce its CO2 emissions
  • The industralised countries should reduce in a 40% its emissions for 2020, taking the emissions of 1990 as reference.
  • The most developed countries should help the less developed countries to evolve by using renewable energies.
  • Although it will affect their growing, these countries in process of development will also have to contribute by developing in a “clean” way.
  • By 2020 there should be a document to stop deforestation.

These are just some of the many objectives the protocol put up to the ones who signed it.

There are many ways to reduce the CO2 emissions but one of the most effective one is introducing the nuclear energy which barely uses carbon dioxide but also has its drawbacks and it isn’t socially accepted, however, it is proved to be a very effective solution.

Watch the video below for more information about this global issue.

We should walk to work!

n the protocol they tried to apply some iniciatives to reduce the emission of gases such as CO2, one of the most harmful gases for the Ozone layer. The CO2 is principally emitted by transport vehicles, tertiary sector (domestic and services) and the electric sector.

On 2011, there were more than 1,000,000,000 vehicles!! on the whole world.  “The OCDE expects that by 2050 there would be 2,5 billion vehicles!” Nowadays, transportation accounts for 23% of the world’s greenhouse-gas emissions.

There needs to be a quick solution for this, because each vehicle uses fossil fuels, which are in ways of extintion, and with renewable energies we don’t have enough! From here we encourage people to start using the public transport or going to work, college, university… by foot or either begin sharing cars.

However, without the agreement of countries such as EEUU or Canada, which are two of the most contaminating countries (they represent more or less 25% of the world’s pollution), start reducing the gas emissions at great scale is barely impossible. Until these two countries sign the Protocol the world won’t make a big step on this fight. Besides, Canada has renounced Kyoto Protocol and USA has signed it but with no commitment on acting for THE COMMON GOOD. Continue reading

The Origins

This link shows the commitment that was reached by the United Nations in 1998.

The most interesting paragraph lists the main greenhouse effect gases. This list provides a starting point, which was the objective of those countries that took the initiative in the conference. They were conscious of the confrontation that the agreement would create in terms of economic interests, and it was essential to be specific.

Once the enemy was defined, it would be easier to identify its origins, so that, revoking to some privileges, the world would continue livable for many years to come.

However, nowadays, there isn’t enough concern of the size of the problem, and we continue ignoring the nature’s warnings. As long as we maintain our emissions, I’m sure future generations will have to pay our bill to Earth.

The graph below shows the situation when the protocol was signed. Was the protocol too late? Anyway, it is clear that great harm has already been done.

To conclude, the protocol pointed out the greatest challenges we should face. Here is the list, copied from the original document:

Fuel combustion
Energy industries
Manufacturing industries and construction
Other sectors

Fugitive emissions from fuels
Solid fuels
Oil and natural gas

Industrial processes
Mineral products
Chemical industry
Metal production
Other production
Production of halocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride
Consumption of halocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride

Enteric fermentation
Manure management
Rice cultivation
Agricultural soils
Prescribed burning of savannas
Field burning of agricultural residues

Solid waste disposal on land
Wastewater handling
Waste incineration

Welcome to our blog!!

The aim of this blog is to give all the surfers who visit this web a general view of the Kyoto Protocol and keep you updated with the latest and most relevant news. We will also analyze each publication and point out what possible outcomes it may cause in terms of economy, environment, political policies…