Trump pulling out of Paris Climate Accord

[toobfreak]

To get every country* in the world to agree that we should ALL clean up the environment for the planet's sake was a big accomplishment.

Still, only words. A non-binding agreement. Just talk is all it is. No accountability, no enforcement, no way to verify.

The U.S., the second largest polluter on the planet actually spearheaded the effort.

Then all the better that we step out of it! Still the same bad idea no matter, just another attempt to globalize socialize one-worldize our country.

The countries with economies large enough agreed to help out the countries that are still heating by campfire. This is the spirit of cooperation rarely if ever seen in the history of this planet before. Then, along comes Trump and says "I don't want to pay anything toward this" even though we are the #2 polluter--who cares? It's cheaper to pollute. Our coal miners need jobs. And just like that, we're out. And YOU are PROUD of that?

Yep! First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap, and if all the other countries still want to do it, NOTHING STOPPING THEM! JUST QUIT TRYING TO STICK ME WITH THE BILL! The US Taxpayer is SICK AND TIRED of carry the world on our shoulders. The Accord won't make a damn bit of an effect, it would cost us hugely, and besides, Trump made it clear he would be all open to it if it can be worked out different that we aren't screwed in the ass. DAMN PROUD TO HAVE A PRESIDENT stand up for me like that and take it in the chin because it was the right thing to do for the USA.

First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap,
I don't know where you've been that you DIDN'T know we were the #2 polluter. I've heard some places say we're #1, but I'll go with the EPA and what is said in my local paper this morning.

Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data | US EPA

Yes but is that adjusted for population???

It's one planet, one atmosphere. Explain why the populations matter as to the amount of greenhouse gasses entering the atmosphere.

The data is skewed against the USA due to its size and number of people! Of course we appear a bigger polluter than we are, if we didn't have such good technology, we would pollute much more. And India while contributing 7% is a much bigger polluter considering the small size of the country and population.

China produces nearly a THIRD of the world CO2 emission yet is GROWING and not affected by the ACCORD.
India, despite its small size producers almost as much as all the countries of the EU combined.
Yes, we produce 14%, considering our population and size, pretty damned good compared to the tiny EU (look at a map).
Tiny Japan producers almost as much as all of Russia!
If you want to say 14% is still 14%, fine, but to cut our CO2 by 20% would be DEVASTATING to our economy, MASSIVELY EXPENSIVE. Now is not the time with our economy already weak and when the benefits of doing so are HIGHLY debatable. Even the PA predicts only a minuscule improvement over a century!
Not a good deal to CRIPPLE ourselves while China and India run away Scott free producing nearly 40% of the total global amount and INCREASING.

Let's take a look at air quality in BEIJING CHINA:

Now let us take a look at New Delhi India:

Now, let us take a look at an American City like Chicago, one of our largest:

Any questions? Pure numbers and statistical data can be deceiving.

 

[Rustic]

Okay. You guys have given your pitch, and now you're out of ammunition so you're going into stupid mode.
Good discussion anyway. I learned some stuff. I still think it was goddamned stupid to pull out of the deal, but I understand a bit more about how the agreement worked. All moot now.

The original agreement should've never even been made but that ass hat that is Obama agreed to it without congressional approval.

 

[task0778]

It's now crystal clear DT is comfortable both ceding the moral high ground and the economic upper hand to countries like China, and endangering the future for all of us.

You think CHINA has the moral high ground when it comes to air pollution? CHINA? Have you lost your freakin' mind? These guys have been opening up coal fired energy plants for years and will continue to do so right up to 2030 and probably beyond that if it's in their best interests to do so. Do you think think they or any other freakin' country that signed the Paris Agreement will spend their money to reduce emissions? OUR money? Oh yeah. THEIR money? Don't be ridiculous.

Have YOU lost YOURS? That China agreed to at least take some steps? They've cancelled 105 of the coal burning plants they had planned. It's a start. And they're revving up the green tech. What is ridiculous is that we are sulking about China being a big polluter. We are second. Don't forget that.

They agreed to take steps but not until 2030! Why is that, if they're taking steps then why the delay? So they cancelled, or say they cancelled 105 coal fired plants, how many DIDN'T they cancel? Funny thing, I don't see that number in all the ballyhoo about this. And what about the 70+ coal fired plants they're building in other countries, some of them in eastern Europe?

Seriously, you think that China of all countries has any moral high ground? On anything? I find that preposterous. Consider this:

Only one large national economy has been reporting sizable emissions declines in the past 25 years, thanks to fracking. The same economy may soon also be able to take credit for slowing China’s prodigious emissions growth thanks to natural gas exports to displace Chinese coal. That country is the U.S. Whatever evolution toward a lower-carbon energy system takes place in the future, it will also certainly be driven overwhelmingly by technology and markets, not policy. Guess who leads the world in innovative technology? It sure as hell isn't China.

I'm not arguing that the private sector in the United States can't take an active role, but not having the government behind it both policy wise and in international negotiations will give them a bit of a handicap, I would think. That is the good news here, if there is any--Trump's troglodyte decision to pull out of the Accords will not stop green tech here or anywhere else. It will be a bit harder having the world's largest economy not contributing, but they'll have to get by.

At least they're trying. At least they're thinking. You think it is that easy/fast/simple to change their infrastructure? I don't see how you can say that this is moving too slow since you are fighting tooth and nail about changing ours from fossil fuel based energy. Would it be realistic to have changed over the economy prior to 2030? For us, maybe not as hard as for the countries that haven't even got half their people with electricity on a daily basis yet.

So you are in favor of the US Gov't giving tax payer dollars to the UN based Green Climate Fund, not knowing how it will be spent or who gets it? Are you aware that the US gave that Green Fund one billion dollars already? Congress did not approve that expenditure, so Obama used funds to treat and prevent the spread of the ZIKA virus to give to the Green Fund. Yeah, the health of pregnant American women and their babies took a back seat to CC.

Obama Raided $500M for Zika to Finance UN’s Green Climate Fund

And BTW, I have no problem spending tax dollars in trying to change away from a fossil fuel based economy. I just want to do it responsibly and effectively, and the Paris Agreement is neither of those things. And I don't what any foreign bureaucrats telling us what we ought to do either.

 

[Rustic]

To get every country* in the world to agree that we should ALL clean up the environment for the planet's sake was a big accomplishment.

Still, only words. A non-binding agreement. Just talk is all it is. No accountability, no enforcement, no way to verify.

The U.S., the second largest polluter on the planet actually spearheaded the effort.

Then all the better that we step out of it! Still the same bad idea no matter, just another attempt to globalize socialize one-worldize our country.

The countries with economies large enough agreed to help out the countries that are still heating by campfire. This is the spirit of cooperation rarely if ever seen in the history of this planet before. Then, along comes Trump and says "I don't want to pay anything toward this" even though we are the #2 polluter--who cares? It's cheaper to pollute. Our coal miners need jobs. And just like that, we're out. And YOU are PROUD of that?

Yep! First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap, and if all the other countries still want to do it, NOTHING STOPPING THEM! JUST QUIT TRYING TO STICK ME WITH THE BILL! The US Taxpayer is SICK AND TIRED of carry the world on our shoulders. The Accord won't make a damn bit of an effect, it would cost us hugely, and besides, Trump made it clear he would be all open to it if it can be worked out different that we aren't screwed in the ass. DAMN PROUD TO HAVE A PRESIDENT stand up for me like that and take it in the chin because it was the right thing to do for the USA.

First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap,
I don't know where you've been that you DIDN'T know we were the #2 polluter. I've heard some places say we're #1, but I'll go with the EPA and what is said in my local paper this morning.

Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data | US EPA

Yes but is that adjusted for population???

It's one planet, one atmosphere. Explain why the populations matter as to the amount of greenhouse gasses entering the atmosphere.

The data is skewed against the USA due to its size and number of people! Of course we appear a bigger polluter than we are, if we didn't have such good technology, we would pollute much more. And India while contributing 7% is a much bigger polluter considering the small size of the country and population.

View attachment 130663

China produces nearly a THIRD of the world CO2 emission yet is GROWING and not affected by the ACCORD.
India, despite its small size producers almost as much as all the countries of the EU combined.
Yes, we produce 14%, considering our population and size, pretty damned good compared to the tiny EU (look at a map).
Tiny Japan producers almost as much as all of Russia!
If you want to say 14% is still 14%, fine, but to cut our CO2 by 20% would be DEVASTATING to our economy, MASSIVELY EXPENSIVE. Now is not the time with our economy already weak and when the benefits of doing so are HIGHLY debatable. Even the PA predicts only a minuscule improvement over a century!
Not a good deal to CRIPPLE ourselves while China and India run away Scott free producing nearly 40% of the total global amount and INCREASING.

And the science is not even settled, if the world is warming who's to say it's not a natural cycle.
FAKE SCIENCE: “Global warming” world map data largely faked by NOAA… climate change fraud rapidly unraveling

 

[oreo]

The maximum expected benefit would be 0.2 degrees, at the cost of trillions. Bad idea.
Alright, but I need that link, please.

Alright, but I need that link, please

Sorry, I was way off.

The climate impact of all Paris INDC promises is minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.

• Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.

Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release) | Bjorn Lomborg

Thank you. But the Agreement calls for countries to submit their specific plans by 2020. How did he do these projections when the countries haven't submitted their plans yet?

They've already made promises of CO2 reductions.
What do the specific paths to reduction matter?

There were higher CO2 amounts in fact 5 times higher than where we're at today. It was during the Jurassic period--when no humans existed. Human beings cannot tolerate high levels of CO 2 it is toxic to them.
Toxicity of Carbon Dioxide CO
Dinosaur Era Had 5 Times Today's CO2

Now what is it that you do not understand about coal & oil NOT lasting "forever.'?

Countries that are NOT moving into green energy are going to be left out in the cold. America has always been #1 when it came to new innovation and technology. Now we're in last place with Nicaragua and Syria-- the ONLY TWO countries that didn't sign the voluntary Paris accord.

Tell that to Submarine Sailors who commonly operate at 4,000-6,000 ppm... for extended periods.. without ill effect.

\

Of course you have a LINK to that--LOL

I'll tell you that the U.S. military has already moved into green energy.

Navy Deploys ‘Great Green Fleet’

A 195 country voluntary agreement--Trump just blew up because he wanted to keep a promise to coal miners--while screwing everyone else that is involved in this country with green energy with an elephants dick. Now who do suppose these other 193 countries are going to buy green energy equipment and hire installations for, from now on. China or the U.S.?--LOL

What is it about him NOT listening to business leaders and energy developers in this country? Oh that's right he knows more than our Generals--so he must know more than any of them also.
Exxon and Conoco Reiterate Support for Paris Climate Deal
Paris climate accord: Big business urges Trump to stick with it
Energy Companies Urge Trump To Remain In Paris Climate Agreement

When you elect a clown, the circus is going to show up.

 

[Rustic]

Alright, but I need that link, please

Sorry, I was way off.

The climate impact of all Paris INDC promises is minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.

• Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.

Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release) | Bjorn Lomborg

Thank you. But the Agreement calls for countries to submit their specific plans by 2020. How did he do these projections when the countries haven't submitted their plans yet?

They've already made promises of CO2 reductions.
What do the specific paths to reduction matter?

There were higher CO2 amounts in fact 5 times higher than where we're at today. It was during the Jurassic period--when no humans existed. Human beings cannot tolerate high levels of CO 2 it is toxic to them.
Toxicity of Carbon Dioxide CO
Dinosaur Era Had 5 Times Today's CO2

Now what is it that you do not understand about coal & oil NOT lasting "forever.'?

Countries that are NOT moving into green energy are going to be left out in the cold. America has always been #1 when it came to new innovation and technology. Now we're in last place with Nicaragua and Syria-- the ONLY TWO countries that didn't sign the voluntary Paris accord.

Tell that to Submarine Sailors who commonly operate at 4,000-6,000 ppm... for extended periods.. without ill effect.

\

Of course you have a LINK that--LOL

I tell you that the U.S. military has already moved into green energy.

Navy Deploys ‘Great Green Fleet’

Really no one's against alternative energy, but it should not be forced. Reliable affordable alternative energy is decades away, we have plenty of Fossil fuels to keep going till that time comes an all of the above energy policy is best. Cold turkey is for fucking dumbasses…

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I believe I heard the ultimate goal was to slow anticipated global warming by 2 degrees. Not .2 degrees.

The maximum expected benefit would be 0.2 degrees, at the cost of trillions. Bad idea.

It is impossible to know what is correct, except that DAMMITALL, cleaning up the environment is a good thing

This wasted money would actual clean the environment. That's why it's so stupid.

The maximum expected benefit would be 0.2 degrees, at the cost of trillions. Bad idea.
Alright, but I need that link, please.

Alright, but I need that link, please

Sorry, I was way off.

The climate impact of all Paris INDC promises is minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.

• Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.

Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release) | Bjorn Lomborg

Thank you. But the Agreement calls for countries to submit their specific plans by 2020. How did he do these projections when the countries haven't submitted their plans yet?

They've already made promises of CO2 reductions.
What do the specific paths to reduction matter?

The man whose study was reported in your article was basing his estimates of the effects of the countries' actions based on not yet specific plans. To me, it makes a difference if the country hasn't decided yet exactly what it is going to do.

The man whose study was reported in your article was basing his estimates of the effects of the countries' actions based on not yet specific plans.

The plan was reducing CO2 emissions.
Said reductions would have a miniscule impact on future temps.

To me, it makes a difference if the country hasn't decided yet exactly what it is going to do.

Well, yeah, there are stupid, expensive ways and smarter, slightly less expensive ways to make the tiny, ineffective reductions in CO2.

What all the plans have in common is their large expensive for their tiny benefit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I believe I heard the ultimate goal was to slow anticipated global warming by 2 degrees. Not .2 degrees.

The maximum expected benefit would be 0.2 degrees, at the cost of trillions. Bad idea.

It is impossible to know what is correct, except that DAMMITALL, cleaning up the environment is a good thing

This wasted money would actual clean the environment. That's why it's so stupid.

The maximum expected benefit would be 0.2 degrees, at the cost of trillions. Bad idea.
Alright, but I need that link, please.

Alright, but I need that link, please

Sorry, I was way off.

The climate impact of all Paris INDC promises is minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.

• Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.

Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release) | Bjorn Lomborg

Thank you. But the Agreement calls for countries to submit their specific plans by 2020. How did he do these projections when the countries haven't submitted their plans yet?

They've already made promises of CO2 reductions.
What do the specific paths to reduction matter?

There were higher CO2 amounts in fact 5 times higher than where we're at today. It was during the Jurassic period--when no humans existed. Human beings cannot tolerate high levels of CO 2 it is toxic to them.
Toxicity of Carbon Dioxide CO
Dinosaur Era Had 5 Times Today's CO2

Now what is it that you do not understand about coal & oil NOT lasting "forever.'?

Countries that are NOT moving into green energy are going to be left out in the cold. America has always been #1 when it came to new innovation and technology. Now we're in last place with Nicaragua and Syria-- the ONLY TWO countries that didn't sign the voluntary Paris accord.

Human beings cannot tolerate high levels of CO 2 it is toxic to them.

At 1% concentration of carbon dioxide CO2 (10,000 parts per million or ppm) and under continuous exposure at that level, such as in an auditorium filled with occupants and poor fresh air ventilation, some occupants are likely to feel drowsy.

We'd need CO2 almost 25 times the current levels before some people felt drowsy.

How long will it take to get to 1%?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Here are some real facts on the Paris Accord, which aims at attacking carbon levels. First, CO2 is plant food, second, carbon is part of life, you, me, animals, plants, rocks, everything is MADE out of carbon. The Earth self-regulates the amount of carbon, storing the extra within.

The Paris Accord will reduce CO2 in the air? Do you know that 99.97% of the air you breath is NOT CO2? Just how do you reduce CO2 by 2/10th of a percent when it isn't even that much in TOTAL now? Ask an Accord Believer to explain that one? Just what is CO2 that just a TRACE of it (necessary to all life) could destroy our planet, but volcanoes and super-volcanoes do not???

For those who may not know, the atmosphere really is as follows:

78% Nitrogen
21% Oxygen (from Plants mainly, essential for the animal life)

_That is 99% of your total atmosphere right there!_

That only leaves 1% left, as a combination of /trace gases./

These trace gases can be further broken down into the Noble gases and IR
storing gases which help to moderate our climate.

Of that 1% trace gas left over, _9/10ths_ of that is ARGON, a harmless,
inert gas.

That leaves roughly 0.1%, or about 1/10th of 1/100th of the atmosphere
left.

The other remaining inert noble gases (combined total of 0.002% total
atmosphere) are Neon, Helium, Krypton, Xenon, and also Hydrogen.

Of the remaining (combined total less than 1/10th of 1%, or 000.098% of
the atmosphere) atmosphere left over, these are the IR storing
components, such as Water Vapor, Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous
Oxide and Ozone, /combined/.

Kind of puts things into perspective, doesn't it?

Don't take my word for it---- go look it up and research it out. The Paris Accord is a scam to yet again like all other "deals" set forth in the past, just bilk more money out from the USA like a fat cow and put into the deep pockets of globalists! Want to know why people like Angela Merkel got that funny look on her face? Because for years AMERICAN POLITICIANS LIKE HILLARY CLINTON have been selling out their country for money, for a price, they will "cut you in." Now that Trump is here,. he IS NOT A PLAYER, he cannot be threatened or bribed.

ALL THESE OTHER COUNTRIES in EU and NATO, etc., PART OF THEIR ECONOMY IS LONG BEEN BASED ON SUCKING THE USA for MONEY!! Now that Trump is in, Merkel really meant it that for once, countries like Germany are really going to have to start carrying their own weight. And they are terrified.

Imagine if Europe had to pay for their own decent military… If we were to drop out of being the world police what would they do?

Take Russian language classes.

 

[Rustic]

Here are some real facts on the Paris Accord, which aims at attacking carbon levels. First, CO2 is plant food, second, carbon is part of life, you, me, animals, plants, rocks, everything is MADE out of carbon. The Earth self-regulates the amount of carbon, storing the extra within.

The Paris Accord will reduce CO2 in the air? Do you know that 99.97% of the air you breath is NOT CO2? Just how do you reduce CO2 by 2/10th of a percent when it isn't even that much in TOTAL now? Ask an Accord Believer to explain that one? Just what is CO2 that just a TRACE of it (necessary to all life) could destroy our planet, but volcanoes and super-volcanoes do not???

For those who may not know, the atmosphere really is as follows:

78% Nitrogen
21% Oxygen (from Plants mainly, essential for the animal life)

_That is 99% of your total atmosphere right there!_

That only leaves 1% left, as a combination of /trace gases./

These trace gases can be further broken down into the Noble gases and IR
storing gases which help to moderate our climate.

Of that 1% trace gas left over, _9/10ths_ of that is ARGON, a harmless,
inert gas.

That leaves roughly 0.1%, or about 1/10th of 1/100th of the atmosphere
left.

The other remaining inert noble gases (combined total of 0.002% total
atmosphere) are Neon, Helium, Krypton, Xenon, and also Hydrogen.

Of the remaining (combined total less than 1/10th of 1%, or 000.098% of
the atmosphere) atmosphere left over, these are the IR storing
components, such as Water Vapor, Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous
Oxide and Ozone, /combined/.

Kind of puts things into perspective, doesn't it?

Don't take my word for it---- go look it up and research it out. The Paris Accord is a scam to yet again like all other "deals" set forth in the past, just bilk more money out from the USA like a fat cow and put into the deep pockets of globalists! Want to know why people like Angela Merkel got that funny look on her face? Because for years AMERICAN POLITICIANS LIKE HILLARY CLINTON have been selling out their country for money, for a price, they will "cut you in." Now that Trump is here,. he IS NOT A PLAYER, he cannot be threatened or bribed.

ALL THESE OTHER COUNTRIES in EU and NATO, etc., PART OF THEIR ECONOMY IS LONG BEEN BASED ON SUCKING THE USA for MONEY!! Now that Trump is in, Merkel really meant it that for once, countries like Germany are really going to have to start carrying their own weight. And they are terrified.

Imagine if Europe had to pay for their own decent military… If we were to drop out of being the world police what would they do?

Take Russian language classes.

Russia is far less dependent on the European Union than the European union is on Russia… LOL

 

[basquebromance]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Alright, but I need that link, please

Sorry, I was way off.

The climate impact of all Paris INDC promises is minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.

• Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.

Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release) | Bjorn Lomborg

Thank you. But the Agreement calls for countries to submit their specific plans by 2020. How did he do these projections when the countries haven't submitted their plans yet?

They've already made promises of CO2 reductions.
What do the specific paths to reduction matter?

There were higher CO2 amounts in fact 5 times higher than where we're at today. It was during the Jurassic period--when no humans existed. Human beings cannot tolerate high levels of CO 2 it is toxic to them.
Toxicity of Carbon Dioxide CO
Dinosaur Era Had 5 Times Today's CO2

Now what is it that you do not understand about coal & oil NOT lasting "forever.'?

Countries that are NOT moving into green energy are going to be left out in the cold. America has always been #1 when it came to new innovation and technology. Now we're in last place with Nicaragua and Syria-- the ONLY TWO countries that didn't sign the voluntary Paris accord.

Tell that to Submarine Sailors who commonly operate at 4,000-6,000 ppm... for extended periods.. without ill effect.

\

Of course you have a LINK to that--LOL

I'll tell you that the U.S. military has already moved into green energy.

Navy Deploys ‘Great Green Fleet’

A 195 country voluntary agreement--Trump just blew up because he wanted to keep a promise to coal miners--while screwing everyone else that is involved in this country with green energy with an elephants dick. Now who do suppose these other 193 countries are going to buy green energy equipment and hire installations for, from now on. China or the U.S.?--LOL

What is it about him NOT listening to business leaders and energy developers in this country? Oh that's right he knows more than our Generals--so he must know more than any of them also.
Exxon and Conoco Reiterate Support for Paris Climate Deal
Paris climate accord: Big business urges Trump to stick with it
Energy Companies Urge Trump To Remain In Paris Climate Agreement

When you elect a clown, the circus is going to show up.

Navy Deploys ‘Great Green Fleet’

Yes, our naval nuclear reactors are great.
Of course libs aren't in favor of a useful, large scale source of CO2-free energy,
because that Jane Fonda movie made them crap their pants.

 

[oreo]

To get every country* in the world to agree that we should ALL clean up the environment for the planet's sake was a big accomplishment.

Still, only words. A non-binding agreement. Just talk is all it is. No accountability, no enforcement, no way to verify.

The U.S., the second largest polluter on the planet actually spearheaded the effort.

Then all the better that we step out of it! Still the same bad idea no matter, just another attempt to globalize socialize one-worldize our country.

The countries with economies large enough agreed to help out the countries that are still heating by campfire. This is the spirit of cooperation rarely if ever seen in the history of this planet before. Then, along comes Trump and says "I don't want to pay anything toward this" even though we are the #2 polluter--who cares? It's cheaper to pollute. Our coal miners need jobs. And just like that, we're out. And YOU are PROUD of that?

Yep! First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap, and if all the other countries still want to do it, NOTHING STOPPING THEM! JUST QUIT TRYING TO STICK ME WITH THE BILL! The US Taxpayer is SICK AND TIRED of carry the world on our shoulders. The Accord won't make a damn bit of an effect, it would cost us hugely, and besides, Trump made it clear he would be all open to it if it can be worked out different that we aren't screwed in the ass. DAMN PROUD TO HAVE A PRESIDENT stand up for me like that and take it in the chin because it was the right thing to do for the USA.

First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap,
I don't know where you've been that you DIDN'T know we were the #2 polluter. I've heard some places say we're #1, but I'll go with the EPA and what is said in my local paper this morning.

Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data | US EPA

Yes but is that adjusted for population???

It's one planet, one atmosphere. Explain why the populations matter as to the amount of greenhouse gasses entering the atmosphere.

The data is skewed against the USA due to its size and number of people! Of course we appear a bigger polluter than we are, if we didn't have such good technology, we would pollute much more. And India while contributing 7% is a much bigger polluter considering the small size of the country and population.

View attachment 130663

China produces nearly a THIRD of the world CO2 emission yet is GROWING and not affected by the ACCORD.
India, despite its small size producers almost as much as all the countries of the EU combined.
Yes, we produce 14%, considering our population and size, pretty damned good compared to the tiny EU (look at a map).
Tiny Japan producers almost as much as all of Russia!
If you want to say 14% is still 14%, fine, but to cut our CO2 by 20% would be DEVASTATING to our economy, MASSIVELY EXPENSIVE. Now is not the time with our economy already weak and when the benefits of doing so are HIGHLY debatable. Even the PA predicts only a minuscule improvement over a century!
Not a good deal to CRIPPLE ourselves while China and India run away Scott free producing nearly 40% of the total global amount and INCREASING.

Let's take a look at air quality in BEIJING CHINA:


View attachment 130664



Now let us take a look at New Delhi India:


View attachment 130665


Now, let us take a look at an American City like Chicago, one of our largest:


View attachment 130667


Any questions? Pure numbers and statistical data can be deceiving.

The Chinese don't like smog either and this is what they're doing TODAY.

And 20% of 14% is a reduction down to 12% CO2 emissions which isn't going to kill the economy in the U.S. In fact it's producing new JOBS in this country to get it done.

Energy developers in this country told the Ass Clown to not exist this agreement.
Exxon and Conoco Reiterate Support for Paris Climate Deal
Energy Companies Urge Trump To Remain In Paris Climate Agreement
Businesses pressure Trump to stay in Paris climate deal

Now we can do as the Ass Clown wishes and take a back seat to the fastest growing industry in the world and let China (who would be more than happy to have this market) take the lead whom will be selling 193 other countries green energy equipment and installing it around the world--or jump in with both feet--as we have done in the past with high tech into this market and expand this new industry around the globe while creating millions of new jobs here that are going to last.

 

[Markle]

To get every country* in the world to agree that we should ALL clean up the environment for the planet's sake was a big accomplishment.

That's not true.

The nations set their own goals. Then in five years they get together and talk about how close they came to reaching those goals. China does nothing for nearly 20 years. India doesn't have to do a thing until they are paid well over $3 TRILLION. Other nations are paid as well with cash from the US.

How is it any sort of an accomplishment to pay someone to sign up for something for which they have to do nothing?

If you agree to pay me $100.00 a week to do...nothing AND I set my own goals. SIGN ME UP!

 

[Markle]

When was the last time you saw a climate scientist say in public the earth isn't warming?
Never.
Case closed.

 

[Markle]

Still, only words. A non-binding agreement. Just talk is all it is. No accountability, no enforcement, no way to verify.

Then all the better that we step out of it! Still the same bad idea no matter, just another attempt to globalize socialize one-worldize our country.

Yep! First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap, and if all the other countries still want to do it, NOTHING STOPPING THEM! JUST QUIT TRYING TO STICK ME WITH THE BILL! The US Taxpayer is SICK AND TIRED of carry the world on our shoulders. The Accord won't make a damn bit of an effect, it would cost us hugely, and besides, Trump made it clear he would be all open to it if it can be worked out different that we aren't screwed in the ass. DAMN PROUD TO HAVE A PRESIDENT stand up for me like that and take it in the chin because it was the right thing to do for the USA.

First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap,
I don't know where you've been that you DIDN'T know we were the #2 polluter. I've heard some places say we're #1, but I'll go with the EPA and what is said in my local paper this morning.

Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data | US EPA

Yes but is that adjusted for population???

It's one planet, one atmosphere. Explain why the populations matter as to the amount of greenhouse gasses entering the atmosphere.

The data is skewed against the USA due to its size and number of people! Of course we appear a bigger polluter than we are, if we didn't have such good technology, we would pollute much more. And India while contributing 7% is a much bigger polluter considering the small size of the country and population.

View attachment 130663

China produces nearly a THIRD of the world CO2 emission yet is GROWING and not affected by the ACCORD.
India, despite its small size producers almost as much as all the countries of the EU combined.
Yes, we produce 14%, considering our population and size, pretty damned good compared to the tiny EU (look at a map).
Tiny Japan producers almost as much as all of Russia!
If you want to say 14% is still 14%, fine, but to cut our CO2 by 20% would be DEVASTATING to our economy, MASSIVELY EXPENSIVE. Now is not the time with our economy already weak and when the benefits of doing so are HIGHLY debatable. Even the PA predicts only a minuscule improvement over a century!
Not a good deal to CRIPPLE ourselves while China and India run away Scott free producing nearly 40% of the total global amount and INCREASING.

Let's take a look at air quality in BEIJING CHINA:


View attachment 130664



Now let us take a look at New Delhi India:


View attachment 130665


Now, let us take a look at an American City like Chicago, one of our largest:


View attachment 130667


Any questions? Pure numbers and statistical data can be deceiving.

The Chinese don't like smog either and this is what they're doing TODAY.

And 20% of 14% is a reduction down to 12% CO2 emissions which isn't going to kill the economy in the U.S. In fact it's producing new JOBS in this country to get it done.

Energy developers in this country told the Ass Clown to not exist this agreement.
Exxon and Conoco Reiterate Support for Paris Climate Deal
Energy Companies Urge Trump To Remain In Paris Climate Agreement
Businesses pressure Trump to stay in Paris climate deal

Now we can do as the Ass Clown wishes and take a back seat to the fastest growing industry in the world and let China (who would be more than happy to have this market) take the lead whom will be selling 193 other countries green energy equipment and installing it around the world--or jump in with both feet--as we have done in the past with high tech into this market and expand this new industry around the globe while creating millions of new jobs here that are going to last.

Why Is China Still Building New Coal Plants?
April 18th, 2016 by Guest Contributor

By Jeremy Deaton

Read more:
Why Is China Still Building New Coal Plants?

 

[Markle]

Have YOU lost YOURS? That China agreed to at least take some steps? They've cancelled 105 of the coal burning plants they had planned. It's a start. And they're revving up the green tech. What is ridiculous is that we are sulking about China being a big polluter. We are second. Don't forget that

They already have a surplus of coal-fired plants. Many of the new plants are replacing older, less efficient plants. So they've agreed to replace fewer.

You have the same goal here that you have for workers.

You expect that because I (worker) made good decisions, worked hard and long and am successful, somehow I OWE those who made poor decisions, did the minimum some of the income I worked to earn.

Here we have me the United States, who has made good decisions, created a democratic society with capitalism to drive our economy and we are incredibly successful. You believe (you as in all Progressives) that because we are rich, we need to give countries who made poor decisions, have held down their citizens and are much poorer than are we, we should give them what we have earned.

No, it just doesn't work that way in the real world.

China and Russia had to be laughing their behinds off when petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama agreed to destroy "his" own country. Shameful.

 

[Rustic]

Have YOU lost YOURS? That China agreed to at least take some steps? They've cancelled 105 of the coal burning plants they had planned. It's a start. And they're revving up the green tech. What is ridiculous is that we are sulking about China being a big polluter. We are second. Don't forget that

They already have a surplus of coal-fired plants. Many of the new plants are replacing older, less efficient plants. So they've agreed to replace fewer.

You have the same goal here that you have for workers.

You expect that because I (worker) made good decisions, worked hard and long and am successful, somehow I OWE those who made poor decisions, did the minimum some of the income I worked to earn.

Here we have me the United States, who has made good decisions, created a democratic society with capitalism to drive our economy and we are incredibly successful. You believe (you as in all Progressives) that because we are rich, we need to give countries who made poor decisions, have held down their citizens and are much poorer than are we, we should give them what we have earned.

No, it just doesn't work that way in the real world.

China and Russia had to be laughing their behinds off when petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama agreed to destroy "his" own country. Shameful.

The same thing is happening for oil drilling, with the technology of slant drilling far less oil wells are needed to drill for more oil.

 

[Dr Grump]

Naw, done in your name. Your Pres. Your govt.

Now, undone in your name. Your Pres. Your govt.

Simple.

Not mine...never was, never will be....

Your president....your government. In your name.

You do know that I'm not American, right?

 

[Reasonable]

Too bad the serial sex offender didn't PULL OUT before Beavis and Butthead were conceived.