Introduction The primary cause of the “failure” in creating an all encompassing climate regime to limit the release of carbon emissions into the atmosphere can be traced to the fact that the main players (i.e. the countries that have the greatest amount of carbon emissions) refuse to enter into a binding agreement that enforces such an action. The basis behind limiting the release of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere can be traced to one particular concept, namely: that carbon emissions caused by human industrial activity causes global warming and, as such should be addressed due to its adverse impact on the climate. It is with this in mind that the Kyoto Protocol (created on December 1997) was envisioned in order to bind states towards a multilateral endeavor to reduce carbon emissions through more efficient and less environmentally damaging practices (Muller, Mendelsohn, and Nordhaus 1650). These aspects could have been achieved through the implementation of stricter environmental compliance regulations as well as requiring companies to utilize production processes that release fewer greenhouse gases. However, when examining the means by which these aspects could be implemented within the U.S., it was discovered that despite being one of the largest producers of carbon emissions in the world, the U.S. has implemented few internal policies to actively curb such actions. This is one of the reasons why the current climate change regime can be considered as a “failure” since one of the largest sources of carbon emissions refuses to limit its production of greenhouse gases in order to conform to the principles outlined within the Kyoto Protocol. It is with this in mind that this paper will delve into the various factors that prevented the U.S. from limiting its carbon emissions. Through this investigation, it is expected that a greater overview will be developed regarding the failure of controlling carbon emissions within the U.S., what policies have been attempted in order to address the issue and possible solutions that can be implemented. Issues with the Differentiated Responsibilities Principle of the Kyoto Protocol One of the main reasons that America refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol was due to the differentiated responsibilities when it came to the type of member state that was a party to the treaty. Simply put, while countries such as the U.S. were expected to reduce their carbon emissions by 30 to 40 percent within the span of a decade, developing countries were not subject to the same strict protocols and were given some leeway when it came to their carbon emissions. The reason behind this level of apparent discrimination was connected to the fact that the economies and industrial capacity of developing countries were still in their infancy and lacked the robustness seen in regions such as North America and Europe. As such, subjecting them to the same standards would have resulted in an economical burden that they simply could not cope with from a financial standpoint. On the other end of the spectrum, arguments when it came to this level of discrimination focus on the fact that developed countries such as the U.S. produce a majority of the carbon emissions being released into