Mark Lynas's Green Grid

Should the incremental approach of Kyoto be extended, or ditched for something more ambitious? Read

In Bali the world's governments have been asked to draw up a long-term plan to stabilise the global climate. Should the incremental approach of the Kyoto Protocol be extended, or ditched for something more ambitious? Deciding which climate framework to plump for might be the most important decision of these politicians' lives - and ours. Yet most of us have had little or no opportunity to participate in the debate. The rhetoric boils down to four options, which I rate here on the key criteria of scientific rigour, political realism, fairness and simplicity. Tell us your choice.

The frameworks

Kyoto Protocol
Contraction and Convergence
Greenhouse Development Rights
Cap and Share, a variant combining C&C and Kyoto2 approaches

{insert name="NSDynamicContent" template='poll_special.tpl' poll=1003 caching=1 cache_lifetime=60 cache_id='dynamic|poll_special_1003' show_poll_name=1 poll_title="Vote!"}
{insert name="NSDynamicContent" template='poll_special_results.tpl' poll=1003 caching=1 cache_lifetime=60 cache_id='dynamic|poll_special_results_1003' show_poll_name="" poll_title="Results so far . . ."}

The Green Grid

Click on the green grid below to compare the climate frameworks side by side (opens in new window)