The Kyoto Protocol and natural resources

Shradha
Balwyn High School
Australia

For years, the Howard Government has been criticised for misjudging the potentially fatal greenhouse effect. The drought has brought home the reality of global warming and with it many unanswered questions. Almost a decade ago, the Kyoto Protocol was open for nations to endorse and ratify it. To this day, the Australian Government still has not ratified the treaty.

Australians, generally, have not had an accurate depiction of the consequences of ignoring global warming. This is partly because we have never been prepared to accept the changes and complications involved. However, through years of suffering drought and climate change, Australians are now becoming more aware and are questioning the devastating effect that those years of hesitancy to act has caused.

For those of us who don't know, the Kyoto Protocol is an agreement made by various countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The 141 countries that are involved aim to reduce their total global emissions by 5.2 per cent by the year 2012. Each country has been given a goal to reach, according to their individual gas emission levels.

We have initiated the steps to be taken for us to help our planet. Nevertheless, the Kyoto Protocol is only a small beginning; it is barely the tip of the iceberg.

For a task to be done well, a proper basis or beginning must be achieved. If this is so, why have rich nations such as America and Australia refused to ratify the treaty? Why are countries that have signed and ratified, finding it so hard to reach their designated goals?

The answer to most of those questions is economics. Australia currently produces most of its energy from brown coal, which is cheap to buy, but produces an immense amount of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is one of the main gases involved in global warming. For Australia to change to a more environmentally friendly source of energy would cost us a lot of money, thus affecting our lifestyle and economy. This could potentially lead to unemployment and increased energy bills.

However, not signing the treaty has proven to have serious economic consequences. For example, the waters surrounding Kangaroo Island, in Australia, contain many diverse species of fish. Those fish feed on the plankton that live in the area. The plankton only live in a region of water that is relatively cool. Global warming has caused the water to warm up and, due to this, the amount of plankton has decreased. This affects the schools of fish, which further impacts on the island sea birds. So, following along the food chain, a whole group of animals will be affected. This could possibly have a large impact on the fishing industry. Also, the prices of products such as cattle meat and other goods will go up, as innumerable numbers of cows are being killed due to drought.

I believe that, after having the chance to think about the Kyoto Protocol for so many years, John Howard should have stopped following in the footsteps of the American President and have made a confident decision to ratify the Protocol. That would have been the proof required to confirm that Australia is on its way to reducing its impact on climate change. As a nation, Australia is so behind in the global pursuit to solve the predicament of global warming and its consequences.

The effects of global warming are horrendous. They include the melting of the polar ice caps, heat-induced deaths in people and stock, the drying of rivers, farming misery, and general changes to our lifestyle.

All of these effects are very important, but one of the foremost is the melting of the ice caps. If the North Pole becomes any warmer there will be catastrophic consequences in terms of monsoons, rains, winds and higher temperatures in the northern hemisphere. As the temperature is already quite high, the polar ice caps have been melting at a fast and consistent rate. By 2004 a quarter of the ice cap had already melted and this caused the oceans that were revealed underneath to absorb 90 per cent of the sun's energy, which was then transformed into heat. This occurred for the reason that, during summer 24 hours of sunlight fall on the ice and, because ice is white, it reflects the sunlight back into space. With the major reduction in ice, the ocean absorbed the sunlight that was originally reflected, and this caused an increase in global temperatures. The temperature, however, is not the only thing to rise. Water levels will also increase, causing problems for the coastal communities of Australia and other nations.

John Howard is urging the Australian people to reconsider their views on nuclear energy. Although nuclear energy has its setbacks and safety concerns, it can cut down on carbon emissions. There are, however, many other renewable sources of energy that don't require the dumping of uranium on our land. The government can, and should, look at wind energy, solar energy and, hang on, solar energy? I find it defies logic that Australia, one of the sunniest countries in the world, places little or no resources into the research and development of solar energy. Instead, countries such as Germany and Japan, with much less sunlight, are leaders in the development of solar energy.

The Australian Government should definitely reconsider the Kyoto Protocol. The lives of the next generation depend upon their choice and our actions. Global warming is a consequence of the advancements of humankind, which is ironic, because every step we've taken forward has taken us two steps back.

I'd like to end my essay with a famous quote by Mahatma Gandhi, a man who had a vision of the world he wanted to live in. He understood that change needed to be approached, if society was to progress, in a positive direction. He wisely said: 'Be the change you wish to see in the world'. This is a principle that the Howard Government should definitely adopt.

Top     Senior Presentations     Discuss this presentation     Previous     Next