 |
 |
I also think it will have an impact on how other nations get involved, because unless the US adopts a policy that will mean drastic cuts in emissions, China and India won't sign up to anything which limits their emissions. Personally I think we need an overall policy framework which dictates how much each nation cuts, something like Contraction and Convergence or Greenhouse Development Rights Chris Robin wrote: >>From what I've heard (from a lobbyist in DC), this comment is spot on. There is a split within the environmental groups about how to proceed. One part thinks it is better just to work on getting an improved energy bill through congress(alternative energy, clean coal, offshore drilling, removal of subsidies)and worry about a bill which sets a carbon cap and associated mechanisms later. The others think that you must push for the bill that caps carbon emissions first because it will drive what is included in an energy bill. The first path is much easier to do than the second path. But if setting the emissions cap is delayed until after an energy bill is in place, there may be a disconnect in the sources for energy generation previously agreed to and any hope of achieving a meaningful reduction in carbon emissions. The hard work has to begin now at the grassroots here in the US to explain that capping emissions is the fundamental piece of legislation that must be done first - and it will be very, very hard to do politically. > >---- my 2 cents > >robin > >-----Original Message----- > > >>"I honestly believe that Obama is committed to paying attention to the >>environment and reducing emissions. But I don't think it means he is >>going to get involved in Kyoto in the foreseeable future," he said. >> >> >> > > >