Spring Break
Green Bush: an (oxy)moron?
Mary Ackerson
Issue date: 3/25/08 Section: Opinion
President Bush supports an international agreement to reduce greenhouse gases, but only if the United States does not have to join.
On March 5, when Bush addressed the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference about confronting climate change, he said, "Should there be an international agreement? Yes, there should be, and we support it. But I would remind you, an agreement will be effective -- and that's what we want, we want an effective agreement … And so in order for there to be effective international agreements, it must include … commitments, solid commitments, by every major economy, and no country should get a free ride."
His argument that an effective agreement must include everyone is unreasonable and seems to be more based upon a concern for fairness rather than effectiveness.
In his continued refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, Bush is dwelling on the perfection of the process instead of focusing on the need to work together to produce results, contradicting his espoused disapproval of "process people."
And in terms of fairness, his claim that all major economies should participate is only concerned with what is most "fair" for the United States. But what Bush fails to mention is that we already had our turn as a free-rider.
The reason developing countries such as India and China are exempt from the reduction requirements is that their economies are still emerging, and they didn't contribute to the greenhouse gases emitted during the industrialization era.
Moreover, by failing to be an actor in the agreement, we continue to be guilty of the free ride that Bush denounces. In fact, the U.S. is the guiltiest of free ride status considering we are currently the largest total emitter of carbon dioxide of any country.
Worse still, the United States has not only failed to join the agreement, we are also taking advantage of it by outsourcing much of our carbon emissions to India and China.
On March 5, when Bush addressed the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference about confronting climate change, he said, "Should there be an international agreement? Yes, there should be, and we support it. But I would remind you, an agreement will be effective -- and that's what we want, we want an effective agreement … And so in order for there to be effective international agreements, it must include … commitments, solid commitments, by every major economy, and no country should get a free ride."
His argument that an effective agreement must include everyone is unreasonable and seems to be more based upon a concern for fairness rather than effectiveness.
In his continued refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, Bush is dwelling on the perfection of the process instead of focusing on the need to work together to produce results, contradicting his espoused disapproval of "process people."
And in terms of fairness, his claim that all major economies should participate is only concerned with what is most "fair" for the United States. But what Bush fails to mention is that we already had our turn as a free-rider.
The reason developing countries such as India and China are exempt from the reduction requirements is that their economies are still emerging, and they didn't contribute to the greenhouse gases emitted during the industrialization era.
Moreover, by failing to be an actor in the agreement, we continue to be guilty of the free ride that Bush denounces. In fact, the U.S. is the guiltiest of free ride status considering we are currently the largest total emitter of carbon dioxide of any country.
Worse still, the United States has not only failed to join the agreement, we are also taking advantage of it by outsourcing much of our carbon emissions to India and China.
Be the first to comment on this story