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 08:25, 2 May 2008 (edit)
Matthew.graham26 (Talk | contribs)
(External links)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 18:33, 8 October 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Supporting evidence)
Next diff →
Line 2: Line 2:
*[[Debate:Kyoto Protocol]] *[[Debate:Kyoto Protocol]]
-==Supporting evidence==+==Supporting quotations==
-*[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."+[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. It has produced no demonstrable reduction in emissions or even in anticipated emissions growth. And it pays no more than token attention to the needs of societies to adapt to existing climate change."
==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]]
==See also== ==See also==

Revision as of 18:33, 8 October 2008

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

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. It has produced no demonstrable reduction in emissions or even in anticipated emissions growth. And it pays no more than token attention to the needs of societies to adapt to existing climate change."

Counter-argument

See also

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.