Passenger Trains > I'd be laughed out of the room

Both Trains.com and the news section of TO had an item about VIA trains helping Canada to meet targets for greenhouse reductions.

If I ever suggested to Southwestern Pennsylvania area politicians and "leaders" that better local and intercity train service could help to reduce greehouse gas emissions in the USA, I'd be laughed out of a room so hard, my butt would land in the Atlantic Ocean.

Dave

I recently read that Canada's emissions increased 24 percent since they signed the Kyoto Protocol.

Country Per cent Increase
Spain +41.7
Monaco +37.8
Portugal +36.7
Greece +25.8
Ireland +25.6
Canada +24.2
Australia +23.3
New Zealand +22.5
Finland +21.5
Austria +16.5
United States +13.3
Japan +12.8
Italy +11.5
Norway +9.3
Denmark +6.8
Liechtenstein +5.3
Netherlands +1.5
Belgium +1.3
Switzerland -0.4
European Union -1.4
Slovenia -1.9
France -1.9
Sweden -2.3
Croatia -6.0
Iceland -8.2
Britain -13.0
Luxembourg -16.1
Germany -18.2
Czech Republic -24.2
Slovakia -28.3
Hungary -31.9
Poland -34.4
Russian Federation -38.5
Belarus -44.4
Romania -46.1
Ukraine -46.2
Bulgaria -50.0
Estonia -50.8
Latvia -58.5
Lithuania -66.2

Source UN

Forgive me if I am mistaken, but are we to infer that you believe that the Kyoto protocol is either damaging or, at best, ineffective? Because if that is your intended implication, I would like to point out that those statistics you posted do not support it, as they are rather meaningless unless you can compare them with what the percent change would have been WITHOUT Kyoto.

Again, if I am misinterpreting, please excuse me; it's the systems engineer within that compels me to comment.

karldotcom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I recently read that Canada's emissions increased
> 24 percent since they signed the Kyoto Protocol.
>
> Country Per cent Increase
> Spain +41.7
> Monaco +37.8
> Portugal +36.7
> Greece +25.8
> Ireland +25.6
> Canada +24.2
> Australia +23.3
> New Zealand +22.5
> Finland +21.5
> Austria +16.5
> United States +13.3
> Japan +12.8
> Italy +11.5
> Norway +9.3
> Denmark +6.8
> Liechtenstein +5.3
> Netherlands +1.5
> Belgium +1.3
> Switzerland -0.4
> European Union -1.4
> Slovenia -1.9
> France -1.9
> Sweden -2.3
> Croatia -6.0
> Iceland -8.2
> Britain -13.0
> Luxembourg -16.1
> Germany -18.2
> Czech Republic -24.2
> Slovakia -28.3
> Hungary -31.9
> Poland -34.4
> Russian Federation -38.5
> Belarus -44.4
> Romania -46.1
> Ukraine -46.2
> Bulgaria -50.0
> Estonia -50.8
> Latvia -58.5
> Lithuania -66.2
>
> Source UN

the US never signed?? or did they and not approve it???
Could this be since 1992? for some reason that was supposed to be the benchmark year.

Anyway, I agree you would have to judge this by what would happen without.

By the way the eastern europeon countries have such a fine record, very impressive indeed.


Bob Jordan

Indeed, the numbers might be more meaningful knowing the baseline and perhaps the corresponding change in GDP and GDP per capita. Eastern European economies shrank considerably with the disintigration of the Soviet Union after the end of the Cold War. Spain has been booming since the tighter integration of the European economies. Although, I suppose from a world-environment perspective it's better to know about total emissions rather than these per capita/GDP figures. Then again, less efficient emission producers (high emissions per capita/GDP) might be able to learn something from the more efficient producers.

Conspicuous by their absence are China, India, Indonesia and the Middle East, containing over one-half of the world's human polluting population.

No, I was merely posting UN statistics, which were released this week. Infer what you will.

>>Forgive me if I am mistaken, but are we to infer that you believe that the Kyoto protocol is either damaging or, at best, ineffective?