thanks members for your valuable time and your excellent opinion(s)
going further into the discussion, let’s face the current scenario. US of A, the world's biggest economy, consumes around a quarter of global energy and causes nearly 30 per cent (correct me if i’m not wrong) of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. though, china now threatens to become the world’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, but that too partly because it manufactures products to satiate bulbous american appetite and consumption demands.
lets check the history as well… the federal govt. of US of A, always washed its hands on the issue by consistently refusing to ratify the kyoto protocol to the UN framework convention on climate change. not only that, few american corporations attempt to cover up their horrible track records on the environment by making only the paltriest efforts to help. you can find numerous examples, but let me quote you one... some time back, wal-mart was pushing to sell 100 million CFL bulbs and american media going all applauds... thereby conniving from the fact that more than half the electricity in the US of A comes from coal-burning plants. and when the after-effects of tampering mother nature were unleashed (if for a moment we take into account the old ‘global warming’ theory), look how ill-prepared we found america to combat major natural calamities... hurricane katrina - a good example.
the developed countries have a "historical responsibility" to do much more, because their unrestrained emissions in the past century are responsible for this holy mess. these developed economies, US of A in particular, caused the problem of climate change in the first place... and now, i dont think they have any right to figure it out to the current developing economies of BRIC countries (brazil, russia, india and china)… but that does not give any good reason to wash our hands from this responsibility.
now take china… china, on its part, as we all know was a victim of its repressive regime and maoist politics that hindered economic growth while other economies were streaking ahead of it... having said that, we must not forget that china did signed up to the kyoto protocol on climate change, but, as a developing country, it does not have a cap on its emissions and so happens to be true for other BRIC countries.
the struggle to save the planet/mother nature from the ill effects of ‘mother nature’ tampering is therefore yet another reason (as discussed above) why capitalism must be replaced with a system that places people on the 1st priority and the environment that sustains them rather than over profits.
… to be continued.
p.s. : extracted and refined from my previous post(s) on the subject.