Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: The Kyoto Protocol is showing little progress in reducing emissions

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 20:41, 4 December 2007 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Counter-argument)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 20:42, 4 December 2007 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Supporting evidence)
Next diff →
Line 3: Line 3:
==Supporting evidence== ==Supporting evidence==
-*[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7165/full/449973a.html Gwyn Prins and Steve Rayner, British economists. "Time to ditch Kyoto". Nature. October, 22nd, 2007] - "It (Kyoto) has produced no demonstrable reductions in emissions."+*[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7165/full/449973a.html Gwyn Prins and Steve Rayner, British economists. "Time to ditch Kyoto". Nature. October, 22nd, 2007] - "The Kyoto Protocol is a symbolically important expression of governments' concern about climate change. But as an instrument for achieving emissions reductions, it has failed...It (Kyoto) has produced no demonstrable reductions in emissions."
- +
==Counter-argument== ==Counter-argument==
*[[Argument: The Kyoto Protocol's target cuts in emissions are achievable| The Kyoto Protocol's target cuts in emissions are achievable]] *[[Argument: The Kyoto Protocol's target cuts in emissions are achievable| The Kyoto Protocol's target cuts in emissions are achievable]]

Revision as of 20:42, 4 December 2007

Parent debate

Supporting evidence

Counter-argument

See also

External links

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.