Buying Kyoto Credits: I Don't Get It

In the April 10th, 2005, National Post Andrew Coyne claims "-it's how much emissions are reduced, not where." - and - "If it is cheaper for us to purchase credits from other nations than to make reductions at home, that is exactly what we should do...".

This makes absolutely no sense to me, particularly when one examines the examples, i.e., where the so-called credits can be purchased. One instance Coyne cited is from Russia. But the reason Russia has so-called credits to sell is that, due to the crash of Communism, and the collapse of many of its inefficient command economy factory enterprises, it is no longer capable of creating the same level of pollution as it once was. Paying Russia will not reduce carbon emissions into the atmosphere. That is already happening, but not because of any enlightened policies or efforts on Russia's part. So, Canada's paying Russia will not reduce emissions. The same reasoning applies to many other less-developed countries whose economies neverwere nor are now capable of spewing emissions into the world atmosphere.

Is this stupid plan a thinly disguised foreign aid scheme? That is all it seems capable of doing. In any event, it will backfire in spades as far as its foolish ostensible purpose. Why? With the million, or perhaps billions of dollars, our dumb government may give them, they will become more capable of creating more industries which will then increase their total carbon emissions. What a scheme! The wordcockamamy comes to mind.