Kyoto is both a success and a failure

Comments on Tim Wilson "Failure to extend Kyoto agenda will mean pain at home", 3/12/2012, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/failure-to-extend-kyoto-agenda-will-mean-pain-at-home/comments-e6frgd0x-1226528457765

The Kyoto Protocol is both a failure and success. That it is a failre is not because 'The journal, Nature, recently argued: "In practice, the 1997 treaty did little to curb emissions of greenhouse gases". The failure came mainly because of the US did not keep its government bargained for and did not do its part. Without the US to demonstrate its committment as the largest emitter at the time, it would always doomed to be a failure. How can the US ask other countries to commit given its per capita emissions is still among the highest and is much higher than those in developing countries including large developing countries such as China and India. That it is a success is because many industrialised countries participated and made a real committment. Rich and high per capita emission countries must demonstrate any deal must be fair on per capita basis.