I was amazed to read that Friends of the Earth agree with the outcome of the Kyoto summit ('Fuelling the green issue', Times, December 6).
The summit's agreement was a purely political one that allowed the world's 'poor' countries to burn more fossil fuel.
I assume that the amount burned would grow rapidly and that the burning would be inefficient and dirty, all of which would massively increase our atmosphere's CO2 and pollution.
To compensate, the 'rich' countries would reduce their clean use of fossil fuel.
That would cost the rich countries so much that they would have to cut down their aid for the poor ones.
Surely that's not what FoE really wants?
R C Baron
Bengarth Drive
Harrow Weald
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article