Tuesday, 20 March 2007

US blocks environment progress

There was a meeting of enviroment ministers in the German city of Potsdam recently year.Which countries taking part in the meeting were industrialised nations,as the United States, Canada, France, UK, Germany, Japan, Italy and Russia and so on.

In the meeting,they discussed with carbon emissions trading and rewarding developing nations for protecting their natural assets.The BBC's Matt McGrath in Potsdam says the economic development of each country has deep relationship with cutting emissions of carbon dioxide.On the other hand,emissions of carbon affects our climate so much.

For a long time,people known this two problems so they want to take an agreement to overcome hard.However,Mr Gabriel who is the minister in German said US opposited an agreement.The US opposition was "not a surprise"said by one delegate.Moreover,it was "not subtle" in opposition because not only hurt any else city but also themselves.(This article adapt from BBC NEWS.)

It is not a good news for us to heard.US is a biggest nation of carbon emission all of the world.I cannot understand that why they are able to so self-absorbed that destroys our common environment.Foolishly,US is one of countries to promote the meeting.I am so sad for US's attitude.If they don't have great environment,how do their economy advancement fast?

Not only US,every government should have a far view for their country.Only when we pay much attention to our environment can we have well economy advancement.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's a big news that I've seen before.
US is too selfish.
It is a biggest nation of carbon emission all of the world.
People who live in US should find out some method to solve this problem.
Bring a clean world back!

Poet Sophie said...

Excuse me for that I have to raise an "Objection!!"
Selfishness is human nature. Not only Americans have that, but all of human beings.
And, bringing the clean earth back is not a certain nation's "privilege" either. It's everyone's responsiblity, instead.
No offsence.