IV. Conclusion

    Despite the Clinton administration's support of the Kyoto Protocol, Congress is opposed to a resolution which does not account for the emissions of developing countries.[65] "The United States openly called for ‘meaningful participation’ by developing countries . . ."[66] However, developing countries are unlikely to sign onto emissions reductions because they fear that economic development will be hindered. The CDM is politically appealing because it promotes "meaningful participation" by the developing countries while allowing them to remain unconstrained by quantified emissions reductions. Aggressive implementation of CDM projects would promote abatement in developing countries, decrease the costs of domestic abatement programs, support sustainable development and increase global competition. Although the fate of the CDM is tied to the political fate of the Kyoto Protocol, technology transfer should remain a priority. Technology transfer can buy valuable time in which to study climate change and develop new abatement measures. Unfortunately, the necessity of technology transfer and abatement may not become a priority "until catastrophic climate change hits humanity, such as Manhattan going underwater."[67]

    Go to Endnotes