I was reading an article on Yahoo about President Bush's plans to address global warming and the emissions that cause the same. He called for meetings, starting in the fall, of some of the largest producers of these gases, such as the U.S., India and China. He also called for targets and goals to be formulated. Although this sounds good on the surface, as Bush seemed completely opposed to doing anything about global warming in the past, I wonder how much teeth this strategy will have in the end. I am picturing a lot of talking in circles, but no strict mandatory caps in the foreseeable future. After all, if Bush wanted to take a real stand on this issue, why reinvent the wheel? Why not just mimic the Kyoto language or commit to joining a Kyoto type sequel, once Kyoto expires? Or why not just look at what California and the U.K. have discussed regarding global warming? I'm always suspicious of the whole dialogue-type plans, since it often seems a way to simply avoid having to bite the bullet and make real changes. Is this just a way to delay for years real action and yet, look like these nations are actually doing something? Time will tell. Let's hope that when the new Administration in the U.S. comes in, the talking will turn into real action.