Responding to US withdrawal from climate change accord

[columbus]

Indeed, so why would China be paid to continue progressing its economy on the back of greenhouse gases at the same rate it was before the Paris accord, and America(and other western nations) pay them while we reduce our economic growth by pursuing more ecologically sound avenues?

Because if the USA reduced emissions by 50% and China increased theirs by 50% we would still have over double the emissions per capita the Chinese do.
Developing countries like China and India have no reason to stifle the living standards of their people so we can keep wasting resources the way we do now.
Tom

 

[Mister Emu]

Developing countries like China and India have no reason to stifle the living standards of their people so we can keep wasting resources the way we do now.

And we have reason to stifle our living standards while they waste resources at an ever increasing pace? No, thanks. The world's greatest polluter and what is soon to be the world's largest economy needs to have some skin in the game too.

And again, they certainly don't need to be paid to do nothing. Again, both China and India's "goals" are actually worse than what has been predicted with no climate agreement at all.

 

[Quintessence]

It's not as if this decision comes as any sort of surprise. Dump's track record is so thoroughly anti-environmental the real shocker would have been getting a clue and realizing the importance of maintaining the agreement. The momentum for action is already present, and isn't going to fizzle out because one moron made a poor decision. There is that, at least.

Interesting suggestion about the trade sanctions too, by the way. While I myself might be harmed by such a thing, I can't disagree with the logic of it. If it takes trade sanctions to get more of the people to understand how important this is, so be it.

 

[sayak83]

Indeed, so why would China be paid to continue progressing its economy on the back of greenhouse gases at the same rate it was before the Paris accord, and America(and other western nations) pay them while we reduce our economic growth by pursuing more ecologically sound avenues?

You are deliberately distorting the Paris accords (or reading biased news sources). The Paris accord is such that every country is called for increasing its emission reduction targets when it reconvenes every 5 years. The next is happening in 2018. In 2014, the targets were what each country's own internal targets already were. Once ratification and internal mechanisms were in place, all the countries will meet up in 2018 for the next set of targets over the next 5 years and so on. Finally the 100 billion in money goes directly to funding emission reduction and mitigation activities in all the developing world. Who says China is going to get anything? It's the most developed renewable energy development region in the world. The bulk of the money will go to other developing nations to Kickstart their own renewable industry or energy conservation drives.. countries like Bangladesh etc. or to find conservation based ago forestry in Amazonia, South East Asia etc. You are reading what you want to read.

 

[sayak83]

Maybe Trump will push for reforms in the licensing regime for meltdown-proof and proliferation-proof traveling-wave nuclear reactors, because: The Real Obstacle to Responsibly Meeting the World's Energy Needs Is Not Unbelief in AGW

This is silly. Paris accords does not stipulate that only solar and wind is the way to go. US can build as many nuclear power plants as it wants as part of its emission free energy growth within any climate agreement.

 

[David1967]

It high time the world took care of itself.

Do they hate to see us go,,,or just our money?

 

[Revoltingest]

Because if the USA reduced emissions by 50% and China increased theirs by 50% we would still have over double the emissions per capita the Chinese do.
Developing countries like China and India have no reason to stifle the living standards of their people so we can keep wasting resources the way we do now.
Tom

If you refer to CO2, your numbers are way off.
Americastan is much less gassy than China.
Even per capita, your claim is wrong.
Ref.....
List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions - Wikipedia

 

[metis]

The steps towards isolating US has already begun. Strongly approve
As U.S. retreats, EU and China seek climate leadership at summit

And we are already catching some heavy flack from our European allies, who may not be allies much longer. Trump pretty well slapped them in the face, and some economists already believe that the Europeans are going to strike more trade deals with China in response.

Everything Trump does makes me shake my head. I mean everything. I cannot name one thing that Trump has done that makes me feel even a tiny bit optimistic about my country's near future.

Ditto here.

He's burning America's bridges behind him, so maybe his new slogan should be "Make China and the Soviet Union Great Again!".

BTW, Trump apparently was really upset with what Macron said yesterday evening, and there are some reports that he's having psychological meltdowns on a pretty regular basis, screaming at the tv and some staff members, etc.

And the Rose Garden press conference yesterday was so bizarre, with Pence and Pruitt praising Trump before and after his presentation as part of it. In all my years, I've never seen that before with any previous president. As one Republican commentator (Nicole Wallace) said yesterday, it looked more like a campaign speech that an actual press conference.

 

[sayak83]

If you refer to CO2, your numbers are way off.
Americastan is much less gassy than China.
Even per capita, your claim is wrong.
Ref.....
List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions - Wikipedia

You should look at the chart again.
Per capita emissions

USA 17 metric tons per capita
Canada 15 metric tons per capita
Australia 17 metric tons per capita
Saudi Arabia 16 metric tons per capita
Russia 12 metric tons per capita
Japan 9 metric tons per capita
China 6 metric tons per capita
EU 6 metric tons per capita
Mexico 4 metric tons per capita
India 2 metric tons per capita
Brazil 2 metric tons per capita

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Staying in or getting out will have no meaningful impact on the climate one way or the other.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

What country will gain money by getting into a tariff tiff with America? China for instance has a trade surplus of over 300bn with America.

It's like closing your checking account at the bank to try to hurt their business.

 

[metis]

Staying in or getting out will have no meaningful impact on the climate one way or the other.

That largely depends on what we may or may not do coming up, but Trump's executive orders negating other environmental regulations is certainly not a good sign. My hope is that the state and local community leaders make up for the utter idiocy and carelessness of this administration.

 

[Revoltingest]

You should look at the chart again.
Per capita emissions

USA 17 metric tons per capita
Canada 15 metric tons per capita
Australia 17 metric tons per capita
Saudi Arabia 16 metric tons per capita
Russia 12 metric tons per capita
Japan 9 metric tons per capita
China 6 metric tons per capita
EU 6 metric tons per capita
Mexico 4 metric tons per capita
India 2 metric tons per capita
Brazil 2 metric tons per capita

I saw that, which is why I worded my post as I did.
Consider the claim....

Because if the USA reduced emissions by 50% and China increased theirs by 50% we would still have over double the emissions per capita the Chinese do.

China would increase to 9.
USA would reduce to 8.5.
8.5 is not the double of 9.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That largely depends on what we may or may not do coming up, but Trump's executive orders negating other environmental regulations is certainly not a good sign. My hope is that the state and local community leaders make up for the utter idiocy and carelessness of this administration.

My point was the that accord itself isn't substantial enough to have a meaningful impact on any man-made climate change. It's a gesture, at best. And, I don't fall prey to the "it's a start" fallacies that people seem to be enamored with.

 

[sayak83]

My point was the that accord itself isn't substantial enough to have a meaningful impact on any man-made climate change. It's a gesture, at best. And, I don't fall prey to the "it's a start" fallacies that people seem to be enamored with.

It's an accord of continuous ramping up of emission targets through review, funding and peer pressure every 5 years. It's not a treaty. The logic is excellent and is far more likely to work than treaties.

What to Know About the Paris Climate Agreement

 

[YmirGF]

It's an accord of continuous ramping up of emission targets through review, funding and peer pressure every 5 years. It's not a treaty. The logic is excellent and is far more likely to work than treaties.

What to Know About the Paris Climate Agreement

If all the parties do what they have a agreed to do and don't fudge their numbers. Naw, no humans would ever think to game the system.... never happen.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It's an accord of continuous ramping up of emission targets through review, funding and peer pressure every 5 years. It's not a treaty. The logic is excellent and is far more likely to work than treaties.

What to Know About the Paris Climate Agreement

Working at its most optimistic (which is hardly realistic), it still wouldn't make a meaningful impact.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

 

[sayak83]

If all the parties do what they have a agreed to do and don't fudge their numbers. Naw, no humans would ever think to game the system.... never happen.

Other parties find such things out pretty quickly.

 

[sayak83]

Working at its most optimistic (which is hardly realistic), it still wouldn't make a meaningful impact.

Demonstrate your case.