>>The US has made great technological advancements through a combination of government regulation and private research. Fuel effiency, cleaner coal fired plants, increased solar, wind and hydro power, smog reduction. If the US had continued to develop its nuclear technology we'd be even further along.
>
>Ok, so you agree that it will take the U.S. longer to achieve the Kyoto reductions than the amount of time Kyoto alloted. Whatever argument you want to make, that doesn't sound like "doing better" to me.

>I think we're entering into the realm of semantics now. The statement that the U.S. cannot meet the Kyoto projections, but can do better, simply makes no sense. How can you make it as far as X+5, if you can't make it as far as X?

If you achieve the same thing over a longer period of time, without the econimic consequences that Kyoto would have caused, I'd call that doing better.

Hindsight is always 20/20 but the countries that signed on are now realizing just how unrealistic the Kyoto are. Since they cannot meet them, and have caused themselves undue economic burden I believe the US is doing better buy putting our resources towards research and development.