It is an ambitious goal, but not as ambitious as some other companies for a specific reason: many other countries with emissions reduction goals use 1990 as their base year. \The United States, however, is using 2005 as their base year. CO2 levels were much higher in 2005 than they were in 1990, so 17% emissions reduction isn’t as good as it could be; 17% of 1990 levels– or an even earlier year– would be much better.
No. At least I would argue that an country as important as the US should be leading the world into a better place. The Kyoto protocol would require a pledge of 20%. The US also spends a much smaller percentage of their GDP on renewable energy than China and Europe. Moreover the US is falling behind in the race for renewables. Finland for example is going to reduce their emissions by 80% below 1990 levels, by 2050, of course it’s only a country of 5 million people but still. I’d say the US should take this as seriously as putting a man on the moon.
Click here to cancel reply.
Signup for an account and start participating in our site today!
You can also login with your Facebook or Twitter account
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC