Looniee

As you may be aware of, in 2005, a number of Asia-Pacific countries led by the US (Australia, China, South Korea, India and Japan) founded a partnership to address energy security, climate change and air pollution issues. The leaders of the six countries also pledged to "develop, deploy and transfer existing and emerging clean technology"...
Such smooth words, aren't they? But that's a rigmarole! A trick that the US recourses to in order to detract from Kyoto and have an ostensible reason not to sign it.
So, what's the difference between the Kyoto Protocol and the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (that's how they call it)? As distinct from the Kyoto, there is no emissions trade scheme, i.e. no quotas that have always been so inconvenient for the US. And still, in accord with the APPCDC, the American companies would get lots and lots of profitable contracts for re-equipment of fuel-and-power sector of the participant states as the US possesses most sophisticated technology. And you know what? This means that after other APPCDC members had fallen into a position of dependence of the US, Washington may start using it as some kind of bargaining chip.

aegyptos

The Laos Convention sounds pretty good as you describe it!