Okay, after having read some stuff on the topic now (still not much, but already more than many people I know), I think I can now take a position.
That article on FOXNews IamDavid mentioned is complete madness. If that's what you base your opinion on, then you should investigate further on the issue. I'm somewhat sure there is some valid criticism against the Kyoto protocol or the science behind global warmin in general, but this is definitively not it.
Item one. The media tell you ? and often ? that the U.S. is the odd man out on this environmental thing. They don't tell you that Romania hates it and won't sign it.
Romania has about 24 million inhabitants, and has a suffering industry and economy. It has only very little impact in global politics.
The USA have more than 10x as many inhabitants, and a striving industry and economy. The US have an enourmous impact in global politics.
Noticed any difference yet? The Kyoto protocol cannot work if the US and one more G8 country doesn't sign it. It can work if Romania doesn't sign it. Of course that doesn't mean Romania shouldn't be convinced of signing it.
Item two. They tell you that the whole world is united in cleaning up the environment. They don't tell you that the ones who dirty it up the most don't have to help with the cleaning ? China and India get a pass.
Looking at an EPA list of Greenhouse gas emissions per-capita China and India, two countries which are also pretty poor btw, are not even in the lower ranks. Any given American or European person is using up far more resources than any given Chinese person (actually about 7 to 14 (US) or 4 to 8 (EU) as much).
Even when taking the less relevant total values (ie. non per-capita), the USA produces more CO2 than all of continental Asia. So don't point at ANYONE.
Item three. They tell you that the world is committed to pay its fair share of the mess. They don't tell you that the U.S. will foot the lion's share of the costs.
FFS YES! Not only is the USA one of the richest countries in the world, obliging it to take up a major part of the costs (something which applies for all G8 countries), but the USA are also the worlds prime producer of greenhouse emissions. (according to DOE data)
Item four. Even there, they tell you that the U.S. should pay more, because we pollute more. They don't tell you that our fuel efficiency standards are the best ? the best ? on earth.
I don't fully understand this item - but I do see and understand the various data sources, many of them American, all saying the same: the USA produce an enourmous amount of CO2, however great the fuel efficiency standards might be.
Item five. They tell you that richer countries should pay for developing countries to clean up their water and air. But they don't tell you that half of those developed countries, including half of South America, aren't obligated to do anything on their own.
Quote from newscientist.com: "The US demanded both before and after Kyoto that developing countries should accept their own specific emissions targets - even if those targets allowed emissions to increase. But in The Hague the US backed down on this one, conceding that these countries were "not yet ready" for such a step. It could still be a big issue if the matter is ever put to the US Congress for ratification however."
Whatever that exactly means - the fact remains that the per-captita emissions of the developing countries are easily dwarved by those of the G8 countries.
Five items of rubbish - and people really believe that?!
To once more quote newscientist.com:
"So how worried should we be?
How lucky do you feel?"