Talk:Kyoto Protocol
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kyoto Protocol article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Kyoto Protocol was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 240 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Maps not very clear
[edit]THe maps are hard to understand since there is no legend. Why not use the same maps as many other language versions:
Should a section be added about military exemptions agreed to by countries in Kyoto?
[edit]I've posted about this elsewhere, but I thought that it wouldn't hurt to post about it here. So, there was this new briefing book from the National Security Archive, saying it is about the "U.S. pursuit of military exemptions to the Kyoto Protocol." Within that post it says
The documents in this post expand that story by focusing on the advocacy by U.S. negotiators in Kyoto for national security exemptions during and after the climate change conference...Pentagon officials...were U.S. delegates in Kyoto...On December 11, 1997, the same day the Kyoto Protocol was adopted...the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties released a decision which enshrined the exemptions within the treaty...The decision stated that emissions “based upon fuel sold to ships or aircraft engaged in international transport,” i.e., bunker fuels, should not be part of national totals. It was further decided that emissions from multilateral operations following the United Nations Charter would not be included in national emissions totals but would be “reported separately”...This document summarizes the Third Session of Conference of the Parties in Kyoto from December 1 to December 11, 1997, including actions taken during the conference, and it lists carbon dioxide emissions of participants in 1990. On page 31 is a resolution entitled “Methodological issues related to the Kyoto protocol,” decided on the last day of the conference. This resolution urges the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) to elaborate on the inclusion of emissions from bunker fuels in national emissions inventories. It decides that emissions from multilateral military operations pursuant to the United Nations Charter will be reported separately rather than “included in national totals” along with other related emissions then being included in national emissions totals of another country.
Maybe something about this could be added under the "Details of the agreement" section? It could be titled "Military exemptions." I think it could definitely be relevant, but I wanted to get your thoughts before doing anything to the page. Historyday01 (talk) 22:24, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
What is the point of the Kyoto Protocol today if there is a Paris climate agreement
[edit]when will this protocol cease to exist if there is a Paris agreement that is cooler than this protocol helps to curb global warming, and the question is why the Doha amendment to the old protocol if it is already clear that the Kyoto protocol is no longer relevant at the present time Никита Холин (talk) 18:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
- The Kyoto Protocol expired on 31 December 2020. TuomoS (talk) 18:21, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Removed "further reading" list
[edit]I've removed the "further reading" list as I think it wasn't really adding value:
- Ekardt, F./von Hövel, A.: Distributive Justice, Competitiveness, and Transnational Climate Protection. In: Carbon & Climate Law Review, Vol. 3., 2009, p. 102–114.
- Katy Longden, Roshni Pabari, Munir Hassan, and Dalia Majumder-Russel, "Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaptation (A Legal Guide)". Advocates for International Development (June 2012)
- Romain Morel, and Igor Shishlov, "Ex-post evaluation of the Kyoto Protocol: Four key lessons for the 2015 Paris Agreement". CDC Climat Research (May 2014)
- Sebastian Oberthür, Hermann E. Ott: International Climate Policy for the 21st Century, 1999, Springer.
- Economics
- Weyant, J. P., ed. (May 1999). "The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation". Energy Journal (Special issue). Archived from the original on 9 July 2010. Retrieved 8 August 2009. From this issue:
- Manne, A. S.; Richels, R. "The Kyoto Protocol: A Cost-Effective Strategy for Meeting Environmental Objectives?" (PDF). Retrieved 8 August 2009.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - Nordhaus, W. D.; Boyer, J. G. "Requiem for Kyoto: An Economic Analysis of the Kyoto Protocol" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 October 2000. Retrieved 8 August 2009.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) EMsmile (talk) 13:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
- Manne, A. S.; Richels, R. "The Kyoto Protocol: A Cost-Effective Strategy for Meeting Environmental Objectives?" (PDF). Retrieved 8 August 2009.
Some improvements to the structure
[edit]I've re-arranged the structure a bit to use more of the generic main level headings. Also, I have taken out some content about the background on climate change or greenhouse gas emissions that is now covered better in other Wikipedia articles (that content might have been important here before those other articles had been improved). I think more work is still require to streamline this article a bit more, to make it more focused. - I was motivated to work on this article based on work I was doing on the UNFCCC article and because the pageviews are surprisingly high (very similar to those for the the Paris Agreement, see here). EMsmile (talk) 14:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles that use American English
- Delisted good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- Wikipedia In the news articles
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in History
- C-Class vital articles in History
- C-Class Climate change articles
- High-importance Climate change articles
- WikiProject Climate change articles
- C-Class Environment articles
- High-importance Environment articles
- C-Class Japan-related articles
- Mid-importance Japan-related articles
- WikiProject Japan articles
- C-Class International relations articles
- Mid-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles