At UN Climate Change Conference, US And China Promise Carbon Emission Reductions

Whoa, is this right?

First, whats the ration of the US to China? The US doesn't manufacture much these days, and it seems to have some of the toughest emissions rules for autos at least.

News reports today cited India and China as the major bad players.

Also, what about the EU? The EU is represented in some places as a single economic entity ( #1 in the world), but are they being counted that way for carbon purposes? Or do they become individual SINGLE countries to duck this issue?

Global warming is a natural process that our Earth has undergone since it's creation. While I agree that humanity has an impact on the warming of this planet via cO2 levels, it's not as problematic as the media makes it out to be. The average person is ignorant of the science behind our planet, and how our weather systems work. Because of this ignorance, politicians use it to their advantage to push things such as renewable energy sources, a means to get away from the dependency of oil; which of course isn't a bad thing. If they make the average person believe that they must change or our planet will be doomed, then those people will vote yes. The "Global Warming Crisis" or whatever you wish to call it, is just another way to reinforce the fact that our world is running out of oil, and that we should be switching to alternative sources of energy. You may disagree with me, which is perfectly allright, but I believe that the warming crisis is over-exaggerated to perpetuate people's agendas. I'm all for making the Earth a better place to live, recycling, using alternative energy sources, preserving our oceans, our wildlife, our forests, etc, but Earth has been going through climate change for millions of years, and if humankind were eliminated from this planet, the planet would still continue to change without us.

Why don't they focus on other concerns, like deforestation (which affects more than just CO2), electronic waste, or consumption of all limited resources? These are global concerns on proven and current issues. Reversing desertification in Africa, for example, becomes an environmental, economic, and humanitarian issue long before you realize that it also is a carbon sink.

I can't believe these comments!!! Are you kidding me, where to start... the US auto emissions are the worst ever, the plan is to reduce emissions by only 15% by 2015, which is to say, too little and too late. The Government should mandate the automakers to make at least 50% of their entire lineup full-electric or other alternative renewable resource vehicles, including trucks! Boo hoo for the automaker who can't comply. The planet is far more important.

The auto industry hardly has the biggest carbon footprint anyways, buildings in big cities are the majority. All new buildings should be forced to produce all of their own energy on site without any emissions AND should scrub the surroundings of CO2. As should existing large buildings be retrofited to do something similar.

Earth has had many climate changes but none are tied directly to the industrial revolution and the rises in CO2 and temperatures, which IS a human creation! The ever increasing forcasts for CO2 and the directly related temperatures, are based on population growth and current consumption. Since, we here in America will most likely not adopt a limited offspring law, we will continue to over consume and use more and more energy. If this energy is not clean, i.e. renewable, we are actually killing the majority of animal and plant life on earth as we speak. Just because we can't see immediate effects of long term consequences, people don't seem to really care about it.

Cookiees453, "While I agree that humanity has an impact on the warming of this planet via cO2 levels, it's not as problematic as the media makes it out to be."

How can you honestly say this? You obviously don't have a clue to the scientific communities stance that CO2 levels are a means to severely impact the planet. If you believe what you see from the 'Media' then you are as dumb as they are! The tipping point is coming soon and we are on cruise control to do nothing! Read a book, 6 degrees. Or see a recent movie, 'The Age of Stupid'. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Every person living today has an obligation to be less wasteful, with products, services, and even in their home. It doesn't take much effort to be efficient when it comes to energy, but it sure is easy to waste. The alternative will consume the planet in a lifetime or two. How do you feel about being the resource killer in your kids eyes, or their kids eyes for the rest of the humans time on the earth? The worst result...no more people. It wouldn't be the first time a species committed self-extinction, except right now, we're doing it knowingly.

I'm a little pumped up on the subject right now, if you can't tell. The only thing I don't get is why are some people out there fighting against it? I guess when it shows up on your front door everyone says no, to change. But they don't really know what that means.

MechEng007, the answer to your last question is simple: Many of us don't believe it. Your facts are incomplete, and you are proposing spending a gazillion dollars on something that is inconclusive AT BEST. No thanks.

We do need to be better stewards of this planet, no question. But you haven't convinced us, WITH OVERWHELMING FACTS, that the sky is falling (or heating, in this case).

And if you reply that there is no time and we must start draconian measures immediately, you'll lose the argument and never get our help.

I could write many pages on this, but IMHO, if the melting glaciers are not convincing people, emotions are blocking their logic circuits. Corporate PR will try to keep us foolish until we are compelled to pay any price for techno-fixes. New, green business models are better for almost everyone, but upset the stock market.
Bob Stuart

Bob, you'll have to convince us that glaciers never melted in the history of the world prior to man and fossil fuels to unblock our logic circuits. Why is this melt simply not one of many melts? You have a possible connection, but your information is incomplete.

Oh so you people are saying there isn't enough proof huh? So the outcome can go either way(true/false) don't you agree? Ok, if I have this correct you people would rather bicker and wait for "solid proof" than playing it safe. I don't get it. Why can't you agree that the longer we wait for the answer, the harder it will be to reverse global warming if in fact we are a great contributor to it?

Ignoring the potential lethality of the situation is a large gamble to take.

Gajumaru, so you people are saying it's much better to completely destroy the world's economy by chucking out use of all fossil fuels on the CHANCE that MAYBE there is a problem? You would be causing the suffering of billions of people on a what-if-maybe.

From what I've heard from the doom-and-gloomers, we are on a path of no return already. If your side is right, it doesn't matter. If my side is right, you are putting humanity back decades with suffering on a planetary scale for no good reason.

If the discussion is about promoting clean energy through tax incentives, marketplace driven solutions, financing research, etc., then I'm on board. If we are talking carbon tax credits, mandatory industrial emission reductions, etc., then I'm out.