Kyoto Countries Face $46 Billion Penalty
Of the 37 signatories currently on the Kyoto treaty, 20 of those countries are releasing more greenhouse gasses than they agreed to, costing them a whopping $46 billion US in penalties:
As a penalty for missing their goals under the treaty, the nations are required to buy permits for every excess ton of the heat-trapping gas released through 2012. That will total 2.3 billion permits for 20 nations, New Carbon Finance, a research firm in London, has estimated.
The potential penalty, 36 billion euros ($46 billion) for the group based on current permit prices, and the fact that only a minority of 37 Kyoto signatory nations may meet their pledges bodes poorly for international efforts to limit global warming.
Italy and Spain could potentially have to pay $6 billion US alone, but they seem to have a unique way of going about not paying their penalties:
Italy is among countries that may go the Canadian route of choosing not to buy the permits they need to meet their targets, said Steven Knell, a London-based energy analyst at the economic consulting and research firm Global Insight Inc.
“It is unlikely that Italy would formally drop out of the Kyoto, however non-compliance is a distinct possibility,” Knell said. “The cases of non-compliance may well pile up as many states are well off the mark.”
Italy’s Clini said the government and industry would purchase the permits together and not withdraw from the treaty. “We won’t pull out of Kyoto,” Clini said. “At this point, we’re in it.”
Italy is sending mixed signals. On the one hand, they may choose to not buy permits they need to meet their targets, yet they would not drop out of Kyoto. In other words, they signed on to Kyoto, yet they will not adhere to it. That’s not exactly following the agreement to a tee now, is it? Rather, Kyoto has become just a piece of paper that looks good when placed in a cool frame. A nice 8 x 10 metallic frame with the words Kyoto Treaty in bold, and all the names of the 37 world leaders attached to it. Ya man, I want me one of those. However, the wording inside I will not abide by.
On the other hand, Italy may actually buy the permits with the help of industry. Who is this industry Italy is talking about? Well, that’s actually the Italian peoples. You see, let’s say Italy has to buy up $4 billion in permits. Let’s also say the government agrees to buy up $2 billion and forces industry to be on the hook for the other $2 billion. The money from the government comes from where? Taxes. Meaning, the average Italian Joe and Maria are on the hook. Now let’s look at the $2 billion industry is going to spend. If industry has to dig into its pocket for $2 billion, where do you think they will get the $2 billion from? Yes, they will raise their prices, meaning, Joe and Maria will be on the hook for that $2 billion, also.
And next year when the Kyoto countries meet in Copenhagen to discuss the agreement, census tells us they will make more ambitious promises to increase the levels signatory countries must abide by to meet already unrealistic totals. And when Italy doubles down and gets stiffed with more penalties, Joe and Maria will have to pay again, and again, and again. And one day when Joe and Maria don’t have enough money to buy spaghettini for their little bambinos, they will look at each other and say, “Where da fuck did olive our money go?”
November 16th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
If these respective countries’ economies end up tanking along with ours, expect them to say “Fuck off”. Not only is this agreement completely unenforceable, it’s clearly shown at this point that it was nothing more than a money-grabbing scheme against the western world.
Good luck making this stand up over the long run.
November 16th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
[...] Read more from the original source [...]
November 16th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
So all these countries will be required to spend billions to buy permits for their CO2.
From whom, exactly?
Each other? The UN? Maurice Strong? Al Gore? The Easter Bunny?
Will the Mayor’s Carbon Credits, awarded for Mind Trap smarty-pantedness, qualify as offsets? (If so, then the problem is solved.)
November 17th, 2008 at 10:17 am
I’m afraid not, commie. The Mayor’s carbon credits are The Mayor’s carbon credits. I tricked the electorate into thinking I would give them credits, but in fact when someone won something they picked their prize out of an Air Miles catelog.
November 17th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
“costing them a whopping $46 billion US in penalties”
And hence the entire point of the treaty: turn CO2 emissions into currency. Cha-ching. If conservatives were behind this shit, there would be WWIII.
Thankfully, the U.S. Congress did something right on environmental treaties. Back in 1997, it voted on the following:
“Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that –
(1) the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol to, or other agreement regarding, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992, at negotiations in Kyoto in December 1997, or thereafter, which would –
(A) mandate new commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the Annex I Parties, unless the protocol or other agreement also mandates new specific scheduled commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for Developing Country Parties within the same compliance period, or
(B) would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States…”
http://www.nationalcenter.org/KyotoSenate.html
Final vote: 95-0.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00205