Should there be different environment standards for developed vs. developing nations?
Answer:
The People's Republic alone emits enough carbon dioxide to cause Global Warming even if all of the other countries were to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions to zero.
According to the best estimates, to stop Global Warming, we would have to reduce world wide carbon dioxide emissions to less than one tenth of what they are today.
We would have to shut down the economies of all of the countries in the world to accomplish that.
That is not realistic. The People's Republic of China alone has enough carbon dioxide emissions to cause Global Warming even if every other country on this planet were to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions to zero.
The People's Republic of China has stated that they will not reduce their carbon dioxide emissions. In fact, The People's Republic of China will increase their carbon dioxide emissions.
We must accept the fact that we cannot stop Global Warming. Global Warming is a fact of life and we must focus on mitigating the effects of Global Warming rather than trying to stop Global Warming.
The sea levels will rise.
Fortunately coastal areas can be protected from flooding by the use of dike systems similar to those in Holland that are used to hold back the sea.
Hurricanes will become stronger and more frequent.
We need to help the affected countries upgrade their disaster preparedness systems for hurricanes.
Droughts will become more frequent. We need to help the affected countries with supplemental water supplies and desalination plants.
We cannot stop Globl Warming, but we can mitigate the effects of Global Warming at reasonable cost if we start now.
No there really shouldn't be. But trying to hold countries with larger populations to the same standards as ones with smaller populations is rediculous to say the least.
The formula used to figure output, should utilize population size in its figures.
Afterall, if a country has twice the population of another, but has the same emissions, isn't the one with the larger population doing far better at reducing emissions than the smaller one?
no
I'd say, ask God, then the answer will come to you.
Developed countries should be held to a higher standard because they have the technology. If the US does not lead, others will not follow.
In the long run, no. But the developing nations should be given more time to meet the standard.
That was the approach in the very successful Montreal Protocol which got wide agreement and seems to be on its' way to saving the ozone layer.
i think there should be different standards for developed and underdeveloped nations. developed nations should have the means and the capacity (economically and politically) to have tighter environmental standards.
Yah it should be. To me standards could vary even among developed countries. Reasons:
1) Every country has her own climatic conditions eg. a country loacated in a valley have to put more strict air pollution standards due to less circulation of air.
2) Every country has its own type of Socio-Economic conditions. Conditions applicable to one country cannot be applied to otherone. E.g a country having Agriculture based economy will have less problem of toxic chemicals in the air. the standards made for this country wouldnot be applicable to the standards made for industrialized countries.
3) Developing countries are in the phase of development mean in phase to provide better life to their citizens. they have less technology available and as well as less resources to put for achieving environmental goals.
Yes there should. If you look at greenhouse gas emissions per head of population, the worst offenders are the USA, Australia and Canada, with the European countries further behind and the developing countries much lower in the league table. China is often held to be one of the worst polluters, but it is a large country with a huge population, still mostly poor peasants, and per head of population, their greenhouse gas emissions are quite low. So it is essential that the developed countries set an example in this vital area. The issue is too important for inaction using the excuse that other countries aren't doing enough.
How cozy,nice,and easy live had always been the either of the said country where any of those mention nation has ever made their living, the UN and all set forth the basic needs for the needy.less shipping and handling,I'd guess.And would offers pre or post products from developed nations to developing nations,and or thought countries vis-a-vis for almost exact cost accordingly or balancingly (?),using moriel as standard of importing or of any importance would certainly useless and or meaningless. I would understand the term Environment Standard are of the Five Basic elements of nearby or readily avails Earthly-matterials, as it would supporting the life of Flora and or fauna or Humane, somehow. But,yes, to whom then new set of facts should be addressed to, any store nearby or re-send to the UN of any industrial related beareau. Biro Biru Bero, tax ! @Rp/Oz.
Anyhoe,Gents en Lads, whatever thinks that couldn't had grown at/on/in the Developed nations couldn't have been impalnted and re-grew in THE developing NATIONS,
So what could that BE, and where's that THE big Developing Nations were from or is or at or otherwise ? Mens ?!
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: