It turns out that the chief US negotiator for the Montreal Protocol on CFCs actually thinks about this question a lot. Being a diplomat, he does not always say everything he thinks, but he does say quite a bit. The fellow's name is Richard Benedick and here is a recent example:
http://www.issues.org/23.2/p_benedick.html e.g., "It is worth recalling that the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer, later characterized by the heads of the UN Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization as "one of the great international achievements of the century," was negotiated by only about 30 nations in nine months, with delegations seldom exceeding six persons and with minimal attention from outside observers and media. I doubt whether the ozone treaty could have been achieved under the currently fashionable global format." mt On 5/14/07, Coby Beck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > "Rob Jacob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > Recently a colleague made this observation: politicians were able to > > successfully pass legislation restricting the -- separate -- emissions > > that caused acid rain and the destruction of the ozone layer. And it > > didn't take an IPCC like process to convince people. He was starting > > his career at the time of the first problem (acid rain) and > > characterized the science as less certain then what we have now for > > CO2. Yet people took solid action. > > > > I have some ideas on what's different now but want to hear your > > thoughts first. > > IMO the most important difference is the pervasiveness of oil consumption. > It quite simply affects every aspect of modern living. Proposing dramatic > changes in its usage is a Big Deal. It is secondly the single largest > sector of the world economy, ignoring illegal drug trafficking. This means > the opponents to restrictions or taxes or govèt intervention in general are > very powerful. > > Coby > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
