Anthropogenic Global Warming - Does More Need To Be Done?

1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.
(Wikipedia)
Kyoto Protocol signatories (and ratifying signatories).



With Canada leaving the Kyoto Protocol after having failed to reduce emissions:

(Wikipidea)
and

(Wikipidea)
and the world's second largest CO2 emitter - the US - not signing the Kyoto treaty, is the world doing enough to stop global warming?

(The last United Nations Climate Change Conference was held in Durban last year, did you hear much about it?)

I don't believe in man made global warming. I don't we can affect the climate of the entire Biosphere by pumping out CO2. I just think that it's a natural global warming that's been going on. How long ago was the last ice age 10-20,000 years ago. So yea, I just think it's natural global warming.

Global warming is natural when it is going at a natural rate. Global warming however right now, is going way too fast to not be a problem. That is due to Co2 emissions. No matter what side you are on, you must recognize the C02 emissions hurts the environment.

"Not doing enough" would be progress. Sadly there are certain countries who actively hinder progress in this area. No not china or india, i am looking at you USA! Because clean energy seams not to be desireable, atleast in the lobbyist cestpool that calls themselfes the government.

In the words of USA "Fuck the environmentalist and protocols that would be regulatory against the private business sector to which we have no rights to force them to do anything, even if leads to the end of the world"

If you can find a clean, cheap, and effective energy source that will not hurt the environment, I'm open to suggestions.

We are at least trying to find alternative energy sources to lessen the use of coal. The Natural Gas industry in PA is growing immensely because there is a massive source here. We use it for electricity generation. I think nuclear energy should expand some more because it provides a shit ton of energy and the power generated can travel long distances.

Zombies, yes folks Zombie energy.

Nuclear energy. Look at France. 78% of their energy comes from nuclear power plants.

I want to see more nuclear energy facilities. That would decrease the amount of coal usage immensely.

Nuclear energy, Solar power in space, and natural gas seem to be the best roads to go.

Once the natural gas industry starts rolling here, hopefully the job situation improves.

And it would better our relations with Canada.

Also the Canada-Texas oil pipe line would provide even more jobs. There is so many failsafes that go into that pipe. Concrete casing, pressure sensors to sense oil leaks, a place for the oil to leak into, automatic cutoffs, and it's away from the aquifer. There is nothing wrong with it and it's still not built. WTF OBAMA!!!

It is clear he is still getting paid to keep in line with the Oil companies.

Yes, because there's an unlimited supply of Uranium, right? Although yes, it is a lot better than Coal and shit. Expensive though. And it will only get more expensive in time.

Time to crack open Tibet for our uranium. It's expensive to maintain, but put it next to a river and that cuts down costs for pumping.

The more you build, the cheaper it becomes.

No, the more you build the more expensive it becomes as the demand goes up. Grant it, the supply will increase, but there's only so much strain you can put on a resource. Ultimately, we will run out just like we will run out of coal or oil.

The more you have, the more resources you have. You can still use coal to take the strain off of nuclear energy a little, but ultimately, it can only get cheaper.