Some arguments are almost too indecent to be seriously made. Take the reaction of Samuel Bodman, US Secretary of Energy, to the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:

"We are a small contributor to the overall, when you look at the rest of the world, so it's really got to be a global solution."

Let's look at this again:
First, the United States is but a small contributor to the global warning. Sure, every industrialized countries shares in the blame. But it may be a useful reminder that the United States contributes about 26% of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. The energy consumption per capita in the United States and Canada is about twice as high as in comparably developed countries such as the UK or Germany. (See here for a graph) A "small contributor"?

Second, "it's really got to be a global solution." Well, there we go. Let's see what we have to offer in terms of global solutions... What about the Kyoto Protocol? This Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) now has 169 parties, representing roughly 62% of the world's emissions. Ratifying states have committed to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases.

The flaws of the Protocol are well-discussed: China has obtained a questionable exemption relating to the calculation of its CO2 emissions; other states have tried to obtain carve-outs for their traditional heavy industries. Yet it is as close as we currently get to the "global solution" that Bodman called for. Either the administration is willing to reconsider the decision not to proceed to a ratification of the protocol, or the Secretary's words ring with hollow hypocrisy.