Slashdot Mirror
French President-Elect Macron Urges Action On Climate Change (newsweek.com)
After Sunday's election in France, Macron's victory "is likely to be a boon for the French digital economy and its startup scene," writes a foreign policy think tank blog, "but the country's frosty relationship with U.S. tech companies is likely to remain over the next five years." Yet even before he was elected as France's new president, Emmanuel Macron was already warning the U.S. that withdrawing from the international Paris Climate change agreement could cost America its brightest innovators. Thelasko writes:
French President elect Emmanuel Macron has a message to U.S. scientists and engineers working on climate change. "Please, come to France. You are welcome. It's your nation. We like innovation. We want innovative people. We want people working on climate change, energy renewables and new technologies. France is your nation."
Newsweek reports this week that without America's involvement, the Paris Climate agreement "will have no way of meeting its goals of reducing global net carbon emissions" -- but that Macron could persuade the U.S. to honor its agreement. ("It reportedly took just one phone call conversation between Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the president for Trump to reconsider withdrawing entirely for NAFTA, another international agreement signed into law prior to his tenure in the Oval Office.") And in the meantime, Macron has also promised not to cut France's energy-research budget, and will even reinforce it "to accelerate our initiative."
Newsweek reports this week that without America's involvement, the Paris Climate agreement "will have no way of meeting its goals of reducing global net carbon emissions" -- but that Macron could persuade the U.S. to honor its agreement. ("It reportedly took just one phone call conversation between Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the president for Trump to reconsider withdrawing entirely for NAFTA, another international agreement signed into law prior to his tenure in the Oval Office.") And in the meantime, Macron has also promised not to cut France's energy-research budget, and will even reinforce it "to accelerate our initiative."
As the US continues falling into a post-intellectual, foreigner-fearing state, the brain drain will only continue.
Vast parts of the scientific progress the US "gave" the post WWII-world was built on immigrants, but now the tide is turning - the empire falling apart at the seams.
I'm a dreamer, the world is my playpen. But hey, I'm a serious person, I can't dream all the time.
The French Academy of Sciences has determined significant CO2 reduction is not feasible if France if they reduce nuclear. Here is a copy of a summary with some translated excerpts;
France cannot achieve a significant reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases from electricity production while also reducing the share of nuclear in its energy mix, the country's Academy of Sciences says.
"Simple common sense leads one to conclude that production of electricity that can meet the country's needs requires the availability of 'on demand' energies, which do not suffer from intermittency and which can be called upon at all times," it said. This means, in the absence of energy storage solutions, significant use will need to be made of thermal and nuclear power plants if France is to increase its use of renewable energy.
Nuclear power last year accounted for 13% of electricity production in Germany, which decided in 2011 to phase out its use of this form of energy. In 2010, nuclear power had accounted for 22%. The academy noted that, even though renewable energy accounted for 30% of power production last year, the share of fossil fuels was unchanged at 55% because Germany has had to open new fossil fuel plants to provide the back-up required for intermittent renewable energy. Germany thus remains one of Europe's largest CO2 emitters.
France, through its high dependence on nuclear energy, is one of the lowest emitters of greenhouse gases per capita: about half as much as Germany. France produces around 540 TWh of electricity with emissions of 46 million tonnes CO2 per year, compared with Germany, which produces about 631 TWh from 334 million tonnes.
"Nuclear energy is objectively the most effective way to reduce the share of fossil fuels in the production of electrical energy," it said. "Within this general framework, there is a real contradiction in wanting to reduce emissions whilst reducing the share of nuclear power. In fact, many studies show that the total share of renewable energy cannot exceed 30-40% without leading to an exorbitant cost of electricity and the emission of greenhouse gases."
The academy said "realistic and coherent" scenarios show that it is impossible to have an energy system based wholly on renewable energy sources, which also "indicate a reasonable trajectory towards an energy solution where nuclear power will have its place in the coming decades".
In February, the French Nuclear Society issued a white paper stating the country needs to maintain its nuclear power generation capacity in order to raise the share of electricity from renewables without increasing the cost of electricity production.
http://www.academie-sciences.f...
"Sleep with your married teachers" yelled Macron.
You know the definition of "free market" has always been the problem, don't you? It is system-dependent.
Don't worry, climate scientists will be well treated in France: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
lol come on, the US actually invented mass shootings...
Yes you pay more in taxes and you get more from society like affordable healthcare and education.
I know, I know, this is a tired meme, but is it a slow news day? I mean to say, what else would he say? There are very few "First World Countries" that have not bought into the Climate Change problem and urged action on climate change, most notably, of course, the United States of God Given Rights.... It would be more notable if he had said "fuck wind, hydro, and safe modern nuclear, let's build the biggest fucking open-pit coal mine the world has ever seen!"
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
The US already leads the world (as in, top 2-3 countries) on public spending per capita, in both education and healthcare. Source of the first, source on the second. Money isn't the problem, it's the state of the system overall, that is the problem.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
The arab shitheads taking over his country don't care about climate change. But they would like to put a sharp object to his throat.
The USA produces more STEM graduates than the market wants. The effect of H-1b visas has been to depress wages of STEM workers. Quite a few low level researchers don't make much money. Still, many CEOs continue to promote the notion there is a shortage of STEM workers.
As for xenophobia, the USA has spent TRILLIONS in the Middle East since September 11, 2001. Keeping Middle East nationals out will reduce middle east terrorist attacks. We'll see if Trump changes his stance on the Middle East.
That the US is going to see significantly more brain drain in the years to come does not seem to me like a very controversial prediction.
That's very probably true but I very much doubt it will be to France where at least ~15 years ago you used to pay over 50% of your income in tax, academic salaries were far lower than the US and Canada and the VAT/sales tax is 20%. There are many non-financial advantages such as the food, country, culture, people etc. but while I loved all of that when I lived there I've noticed that Americans seem to care quite a bit more about the financial side and on the US scale the politics is probably somewhere left of what they would call communism (although it's actually not much to the left of much of Europe) so I doubt France will be a top choice of destination.
He's no centrist, but a royalist that panders to leftist causes.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Yes, but what if you deduct the cost of football?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Yes you pay more in taxes and you get more from society like affordable healthcare and education.
And for entrepreneurs, this means healthy and well-educated workers, which is a requirement to be productive.
From an American, to all American scientists working on climate change: PLEASE, go to France.
In fact, I hope everyone deeply concerned about climate change goes immediately to France. I'm sure you'll all get a great deal of important work done...there.
-Styopa
and it will continue to grow.
Yet, idiots are worried about a nation that emits less than 14%, and is dropping fast.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Too many people in the US disbelieve evolution. This goes beyond right and left, this is a sickness inehrent to your cultural ways abd the too high influence of christianity in your culture.
It is capital that drives the place where talent resides, not morons like Macron.
Is Micheal "hockey stick" Mann going to flock to France? Let's hope so but I am not holding my breath. Then again Macron could fund this climate (gate) scientist and he would surely consider.
What would you expect when most of the world moved production to China, blue skies above?
The sky is falling! How do we know? The bankers told us so!
No, the complaints about nukes is ALL ABOUT ITS SAFETY, DUMBASSS.
And how do you get to claim that either are two of the most important tools for solving the problems with AGW? Cutting fossil fuels is required or all other possible actions taken are moot. So that's #1. GMOs solve no problem themselves in food security and add several more. Unless you're going to mandate that all GMOs are unpatentable therefore freely adoptable to "solve world hunger", you're just deluding others and maybe even yourself.
And it's just too damn late for nukes to be any future stake in decarbonising. Want to piss and moan at people? Piss and moan at deniers. If they hadn't just doubled down on the stupid to deny the problem and delay any action, there'd be 30 years of investment into nuclear power to address a problem that everyone accepted and were willing to spend money and effort on, rather than a disproven hypothesis set up by a cabal of illuminati to control the west and destroy capitalism.
But no, you whine about "Greens" as if they have the political clout to do it.
I have actually worked with the French research institute for Solar energy, in fact I am extending a project for them right now. It is a security and burocracy nightmare. Much worse than in Germany. There is also the language barrier, German is easier to learn for English speakers. Nice people though, and they have a lot of state money to blow.
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
and it will continue to grow.
I think it's time you update your prejudice. China is doing more to stem emissions than most of the west while still rising out of poverty and increasing its energy demand at the same time. Compared to the USA it's CO2 emissions per person are far lower. Investment in renewables dwarf the USA, as does production of renewable energy sources.
Yet, idiots are worried about a nation that emits less than 14%, and is dropping fast.
Nope, smart people are worrying about idiots who rest on their laurels while the rest of the world is investing in solving the problem. The idiots here are the USA, comfortable in the fact that their emissions are only 14% of the total due to the abuse of a statistic that ignores the fact that they are the 3rd largest emitter per person in the world and more than double that of China. Then these idiots (I'm talking about you here) will claim that they are dropping fast abusing the same statistic which when realised per capita actually puts you pretty damn far down on the list of countries solving the problem.
Per person you are performing worse than China. Per person you are solving the problem slower than China.
From behalf of the rest of the world: Fuck you for even daring to compare yourself to a country like China who are actually making an effort.
Yes.. if only we had half of our country in poverty with no wealth to speak of. Then we could change our ranking on a meaningless statistic like per person emissions.
Under the Dome?
I consider myself "left", kinda. You said:
> the left disbelieves GMO and nuclear safety
I don't "disbelieve" GMO or nuclear. Actually, for a median citizen, I'm pretty well educated to grasp what both involve.
What I don't want at all is to see GMO or nuclear in the hands of corrupt, cost-cutting, cynical oligopolies (as is the case now). If history is any measure, "capitalism" as we have it now cannot cope with that concentration of power.
Not against capitalism per se, but having (soon) Bayer/Monsanto and perhaps four others totally controlling crops... doesn't compute for me.
Same for nuclear.
Public spending in education as a percentage of GDP per capita is actually not high if you read those graphs the proper way. However, you are right, healthcare is indeed very high even though it covers very few people, and it just shows how fucked up the system is.
False. Everyone gets health care.. Stop listening to liars and stop repeating their lies.
Good point. By the way, where was the device you used to post this comment made?
Lots of people "on the left" simply do not believe the promises of the companies and trade groups that their products are known to be safe (GMO) or known to be managed safely (nuclear).
Something that I do not see enough is documentary evidence that the decisionmakers in technical agriculture or in management of nuclear facilities could give two shits about the long term effects of their work (GMO) or costs of waste management (nuclear).
I for one fully trust decisionmakers to increase their profits to the exclusion of all other goals unless they are held strictly and personally accountable for their choices.
GMO gives strong, almost monopolistic market power to their companies. Nuclear is so capital intensive and the fuel reprocessing/waste issue is so expensive that they have a hard time competing without cutting corners.
Solve the incentive problems and allow for well-managed creative solutions to the downside risks, and the discussion will change dramatically. Until we see that these liars are held to account for lying then the greenies will use whatever (admittedly weak) logic they can muster to prevent or limit the fucking-over of those who lack influence over the decisions.
If you make a profit off your innovation, France will be happy to take most of it in taxes. So yeah, France welcomes innovative people, just don't expect to be rewarded.
Spoken like a true USian (although I have no idea whether you actually are one).
Yes France - and indeed most western European countries - are quite prepared to tax the rich (& richer), in order to achieve a more equitable & fair society. They also get more for this, including the "close to overall best heath care" in the world & generally a better life/work balance.
If you want to play "winner takes all" then (currently) the US will suit you.
With regard to your cherry-picked crime data, well I can cherry-pick data too! In 2013 the US has a homicide rate of 3.9 (per 100,000), whilst in 2014 France's was 1.2 [that's the only data I have access to right now] ... so that's saying you're 3.x times more likely to be murdered in the US than in France. You're also nearly 7 times more likely to be incarcerated in the US ("The Land of The Free") than in France. IMO, France does a pretty good job at living up to "Liberté, égalité, fraternité".
Now, before someone suggests that I hate America & should go live in France ... I really don't. I just want America to be the best version of itself that it can possibly be, and that means acknowledging when some things aren't optimal. Chanting "USA! USA!" fixes nothing.
and we WILL continue shitting down your worthless cuckold neck
So thoroughly debunked that's its not even funny enymore.
parts of it was made in a nation that CHOSE and CONTINUES TO CHOOSE to use Coal for the majority of their electricity.
In fact, in America, coal has dropped from 60% of our electricity and is now down below 28%, and by end (start?) of 2018, we will be below 22% coal.
That will mean that we will be well below 200 GW or less than 1/5 of a TW.
China is at 1.1 TW JUST OF COAL. In addition, they continue to add 30-50 GW of new coal EACH YEAR. Even with the projects that they stopped, those were above and beyond the planned 30-50 GW. By 2030, China is claiming that they will be at ~1.75 TW of coal.
So, what choices did YOUR nation make? If you live in Germany, you continue to add new coal plants. But here in America, we have not added new coal in several years, but have dropped more than 250 GW over the last 9 years.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
and it will continue to grow.
I think it's time you update your prejudice. China is doing more to stem emissions than most of the west while still rising out of poverty and increasing its energy demand at the same time. Compared to the USA it's CO2 emissions per person are far lower. Investment in renewables dwarf the USA, as does production of renewable energy sources.
So much BS here.
1) China's electrify is around 82-85% from coal. Because china is adding 30-50 GW of NEW COAL PLANTS each year, while at the same time, adding less than 30 GW of wind/solar/hydro/nukes each year, they will actually maintain OR increase their emissions from coal by 2030. In fact, right now, they are around 1.1 TW of coal-powered electricity. In 2030, they are projecting to be ~ 1.75 TW. IOW, China will add more coal plants in the next 13 years, than America and EU28 can cut because together, we are less than 500 GW TODAY.
Yet, idiots are worried about a nation that emits less than 14%, and is dropping fast.
Nope, smart people are worrying about idiots who rest on their laurels while the rest of the world is investing in solving the problem. The idiots here are the USA, comfortable in the fact that their emissions are only 14% of the total due to the abuse of a statistic that ignores the fact that they are the 3rd largest emitter per person in the world and more than double that of China. Then these idiots (I'm talking about you here) will claim that they are dropping fast abusing the same statistic which when realised per capita actually puts you pretty damn far down on the list of countries solving the problem.
Per person you are performing worse than China. Per person you are solving the problem slower than China.
From behalf of the rest of the world: Fuck you for even daring to compare yourself to a country like China who are actually making an effort.
America continues to develop the majority of AE that is going on. Far far more than China does. FOr example, the vast majority of the companies in China that do solar, were basically stolen from the US to China.
In addition, idiots, like you, will use emissions per capita as a line which is a joke. In the first case, America has NEVER been in the top 3 per capita. Many other nations emit a lot more than America does, in Per capita.
We regularly rate in the top 10-15, but top 3? Nope. As it is, America's per capita continues to drop, while China's grows massively. They are just under America as it is
But, per capita is about the worst normalization going. WHy? Because ppl in general do not decide what plants utilities will use. Basically, gov and businesses decide this. As such, emissions per $ GDP (real) is a superior measure. And it turns out that America was in the middle, with China at the bottom clear back in 200*s time. Now, America is in the top 25% for low emission, while China remains in the bottom 5 nations.
In fact, even in per capita, America continues DOWNWARD, while CHina continues upwards.
And one reason why you idiots LOVE to use 10 year old data, or just make wild claims with nothing to back it up, is that America continues to lower our output, while Europe and CHina continue to grow theirs.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
So much BS here.
You got that right. Thank you for you link to data from 5 years ago. Update your prejudice you filthy American.
in POF, American emissions are down even further, while CHina's has actually gone up.
And it is obvious that ppl like you do not really care about the environment or CO2, just want to be dicks.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Btw, we run a 10 kw solar system, along with own a 2013 85 model S. We are also looking at switching to geo-thermal HVAC. I know our emissions are well below not only Chinese , but even below average European. So nothing filthy here. Yet, based on the fact that you do not know or understand the issues with co2 emissions, I will guess that you have done little to solve your emissions. IOW, you are the filthy and stupid American.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.