• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Delegates from more than 150 nations are in Bonn, Germany, discussing
ways to monitor, measure, and ultimately, to regulate land use, in order
to prevent global warming, which many scientists say is not occurring.

The two-week-long meeting is preparing for the 5th meeting of the
Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Framework Convention on Climate
Change to be held next October. The decisions made in Bonn now, however,
will likely become the rules which govern the implementation of
the un-ratified Kyoto Protocol.

Article 2 of the Protocol requires protection of href="http://www.eco.freedom.org/el/"> carbon sinks, and the
promotion of sustainable agriculture. The delegates are attempting to
define what those terms mean, and how to enforce them.

Carbon sinks are large areas of vegetation, such as forests,
pastures, and crop lands. Vegetation absorbs carbon dioxide, which is
the primary target for emissions reductions required by the Kyoto
Protocol. To maximize carbon storage in vegetation, the U.N. delegates
want to minimize land use changes.

There is no scientific evidence that reductions in carbon emissions
will affect climate change one way or the other, according to more than
15,000 American
scientists
.

International regulation of land use is a direct usurpation of
national sovereignty, and an infringement of every American’s
inalienable right to own and control the use of private property.

And there is another problem: carbon sinks are the largest violator
of the EPA’s most recent air quality standards that limit href="http://www.sovereignty.net/p/clim/">biogenic
volatile organic compounds (BVOCs). Vegetation, primarily trees and
grasses, produces about 90 percent of the world’s BVOCs. All human
activity produces only about 10 percent. This fact illustrates more the
absurdity of the EPA’s clean air standards than the futility of the U.N.
discussions.

By focusing on the details of the Kyoto Protocol, the U.N. is
assuming that the Protocol will be implemented, even if not ratified. So
far, in the nearly two years since it was adopted in Kyoto, only eight
nations have ratified the protocol, none of which are bound by the
Protocol’s
requirements.

The Protocol cannot be ratified as it now stands. The language in the
Protocol requires ratification by the United States before the Protocol
becomes international law. The U.S. Senate adopted a resolution stating
that the Protocol would not be ratified unless all nations are bound by
it. The Protocol binds only 38 developed nations, leaving 137 nations
unaffected. The Protocol cannot be amended until it becomes
international law. And without U.S. ratification, it cannot become
international law.

Of course, the Senate Resolution could be overturned someday by a
Democratic majority, which would pave the way for U.S. ratification. The
Clinton/Gore administration is apparently counting on a Democratic sweep
in 2000, because the Protocol has not even been submitted to the Senate
for consideration.

In the meantime, the administration is moving forward with a variety
of initiatives to implement the policies required by the Protocol, as if
it had been ratified. The recent tightening of the clean air standards
are seen by many as a “back-door” way to implement the emissions
reduction requirements of the Protocol. The ecosystem management policy
is already restricting land use changes as required by the Protocol, and
other un-ratified international treaties.

Neither the climate change treaty, nor the Kyoto Protocol could have
happened without the support of the delegates appointed by the
Clinton/Gore administration. Those same delegates are now in Bonn,
pushing the Protocol forward, totally disregarding the concerns of the
U.S. Senate and the American people.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.