Canada and the European Union were instrumental in the effort to get the protocol ratified. The United States had refused to participate in it while major developing countries like China and India were exempt from early emissions, although they did join it as signatories. Canada's conservatives have always protested the protocol, saying it would cost jobs and have little effect on emissions. They now point out that Canada's annual greenhouse gas releases are about 30 percent higher than they were in 1990.

"Sadly, the real international commitments were only followed by empty rhetoric," says Canada's Environment Minister John Baird, in a speech.

Baird is quick to acknowledge that greenhouse gases are rising and that the climate is changing. The air is dirtier than ever before, he says. But after years of neglect on the part of the Liberal government there, he says that Canada must do an about-face because of "one of the worst environmental records among industrialized countries."

According to Baird, Canada can meet its newer and more realistic commitment by mandating "strict" targets for industry that have the option of making in-house reductions, purchasing offsets or taking advantage of domestic emissions trading. The market can play a role, he says, noting that the country is exploring a trading exchange whereby U.S. and Mexican firms can participate.

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore was critical, calling provisions in the plan harmful. Specifically, he points to ones that would allow industry to increase their greenhouse gas emissions -- but only if they increase their production levels -- calling them a sham, and circumspect because they are supported by Big Oil. Under the plan, the "intensity" of those releases must be cut. Any macroeconomic risks pale in comparison to the environmental consequences of caving in to industry, Gore noted while promoting his movie. Rising temperatures will cause unprecedented harm.

"In my opinion, it is a complete and total fraud," Gore says. "It is designed to mislead the Canadian people."

The Rhetoric

Kyoto detractors say that global warming is not a scientific fact. At the same time, manufacturing groups in Canada are saying that full implementation of Kyoto would cost about 450,000 potential jobs. A Canadian taxpayer group adds that incomes after inflation would drop by 5.5 percent there. That's because prices would have to rise and wages will have to be slashed to pay for the cost of implementing Kyoto.

That's why conservatives there support alternatives to the Kyoto strategy -- ones that they say will result in real reductions. For example, the government is starting a technology investment fund that will be dedicated solely to finding new solutions to escalating greenhouse gases. One idea: carbon capture and storage for oil sands development and electric generation.

"The development of new technologies will benefit the global effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," says Baird. "It will allow Canada to become a leader in new green technologies, with potential export markets around the world."

The reality is that any kind of regulations cause economic adjustments. Already, Kyoto is responsible for prompting a multi-billion dollar market for new technologies there. Some of the technological developments include such things as retrofitting existing structures and building new ones with state-of-the-art components. It has also led to bio-fuels replacing petroleum in some fleets as well as the development of renewable energy sources and sequestration of carbon emissions by growing trees.

And the idea of using free market principles to promote more action is also one used by Kyoto. Any positive deed is now given a value by a Canadian agency that issues credits, which can then be traded through brokers and exchanges. The credits can also be sold to Canada's own Climate Fund and the government there will buy them. Today, there's an estimated $1 billion (Canadian) market for carbon emissions credits.

The free market approach has its critics who say some industrial facilities will find it cheaper to buy credits than to install new technologies, all of which benefits a few bankers that profit with every exchange. In fact, a recent Financial Times investigation found that such programs in Europe are riddled with examples of organizations buying credits that do not yield any reductions. Furthermore, there is now a surplus of credits, making it cheap for companies to get the "pass" they need to emit more than they should.

All of the claims and counter claims obscure the truth. Nations, hopefully, will grow economically. And, as a result, their greenhouse emissions will increase. But, governments can mandate that some of that wealth be re-invested in pollution control technologies while simultaneously setting lower emission levels. For some, Kyoto may be the best means to achieve cuts. Others, though, may have a different scheme. Canada has reversed course and it will be a matter of time before environmental analysts can see who is right.

Copyright © 1996-2006 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.