Global Warming In the article Carbon dioxide emissions are not the cause of global warming, Cihark (2007)

presumes the most outstanding claim is that the more carbon dioxide emissions can cause disadvantages more than advantages which is completely incorrect. For instance, Harrabin (2011) indicates that production of carbon dioxide may make some current diseases connected with breathing, heart and other health effects worse. Furthermore, in the same article, the author goes on to state that reducing carbon emission by five percent can decrease the premature death rate by three to four percent. Moreover, according to Bernard, Samet, Grambsch, Ebi and Romieu (2011), the seriously harmful impact of increasing carbon dioxide emissions is that it can lead to a thousand mortalities every year in many regions of America, especially California with thirty percents of one thousand excess deaths. In addition, the second major argument of Cihark (2007), which is convincing, is that the expenses of Kyoto Protocol are high. A good example of this is the annual costs of this agreement may be as high as three hundred billion dollars in America (America Council for Capital Formation, n.d). Besides that, according to Weyant and Hill (2011), it is estimated that the taxpayers would spend between one hundred to four hundred billion dollars on the Kyoto Treatys expenses and the arrangement would cost the total revenue of United States government roughly one hundred and sixteen billion dollars per year. All the evidence above shows that the world should apply the Kyoto Protocol despite the exceedingly high costs of the agreement because carbon dioxide emissions can lead to the severe effects on people health. The concern about the Kyoto Treatys expenses may be resolved by the technology development in the future. Reference list: 1. American Council for Capital Formation n.d, Global warming: the high cost of the Kyoto Protocol, American Council for Capital Formation, viewed 26th March 2011, <http://69.163.211.169/publications/70/global-warming-the-highcost-of-the-kyoto-protocol>. 2. Bernard, SM, Samet, JM, Grambsch, A, Ebi, KL & Romieu, I 2011, The potential impacts of climate variability and change onair pollution-related health effects in the United States, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, viewed 26th March 2011, <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1240667/>. 3. Cihak, RJ 2007, Carbon dioxide emissions are not the cause of global warming, Opposing Viewpoints Critical Thinking, viewed 26th March 2011, Gale. 4. Harrabin, R 2011, Benefit to cutting black carbon, BBC News, viewed 26th March 2011, <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12548160>. 5. Weyant, JP & Hill, J 2011, The costs of the Kyoto Protocol, International Association for Energy Economics, viewed 26th March 2011, <http://www.iaee.org/cn/publications/kyoto.aspx>.