Slashdot Mirror
America is Falling Behind On Its Paris Climate Pledge (technologyreview.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: The US remains well behind pace to meet its commitments to cut greenhouse-gas emissions under the landmark Paris climate agreement. Under current policies, the nation will reduce climate pollution between 12 and 20 percent from 2005 levels by 2025, according to a Rhodium Group analysis published today. That's well below the 26 to 28 percent target agreed to under the Paris accords. The report estimates that total emissions between 2020 and 2030 could be 196 million metric tons lower than Rhodium projected last year. That's due to an increase in the number of planned coal plant closures, as well as the falling costs of natural gas, renewables, and electric vehicles. Slower economic growth forecasts were also a factor.
The newly planned recession will curb so much emissions that you wouldn't even believe it.
Believe me, the number of people staying home from work will be big, really huge.
We won't even need a wall, it will be so bad that the Mexicans won't even want to come here.
How can the US be behind commitments it didn't make. We pulled out.
didn't the Cheeto in Chief pull out of the Paris agreement?
The US pull out of this agreement?
You mean the same 'Paris Climate Agreement' that we ARE NOT A PART OF??
The OP seems to have forgotten that part.
The U.S. has no commitments to the Paris agreements; we withdrew from them in 2017.
Quick - throw money at the Chinese to make solar panels for other people for... environment!!
Thought we backed out of this scam before it got off the ground...
Trump and his brain dead administration doesn't believe in climate change. That and that they pulled out because it was "a bad deal". Every deal that doesn't give the US everything for nothing in return is a bad deal for Trump, no compromise.
You are a dumb idiot.
Good thing we pulled out...as that would of been embarrassing.
Since the current administration's opinion on the matter can be summed up with "fake news!", "climate change? what climate change?", and "we're bringing back coal". And whose appointed head of the EPA has those same attitudes but in all caps?
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Europe will reduce their economic outputs to follow these climate change pledges. And China will just lie about it. The United States is actually smart enough not to mandate by government fiat to do something. No, the free market economy is the best way to handle this. Eventually solar panels, wind mills, electric cars, etc will be cheaper than their fossil fuel counter parts. When that happens the market will naturally switch over. No need to regulate the switch. Unless you want to make your own economies more uncompetitive.
If the world governments want to do something about pollution, focus on third world plastic dumping.
It was a horrible agreement. There is no binding legal obligation as it was carefully worded to avoid the need for being an actual treaty. It was also punitive to the US and an economic transfer at its heart rather than an actual tool to improve things. It belongs in the trash heap.
You mean the Paris accord that was never ratified by the USA? Who cares what we didn't promise to do?
We withdrew from it...
Of course USA gets singled out for missing 'targets' because it only reduced CO2 by x amount.
So...which of the enlightened countries in developed world met or exceeded their targets?
Also, when do the 3rd worlders start getting paid their Paris 'mitigation' checks? As I understand, that is increasingly contentious problem at the Paris Carbon-con.
If you are going to be dead before climate change becomes a problem, why should someone care?
Good thing the US is proposing a better alternative instead of just ignoring the issue entirely.
The model had the US and Europe as moneybags for the world. Now its left to Europe, that IS a better alternative. When Europe withdraws, better still.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
We're to busy making America great again.
Doesn't matter.
China and India dwarfs everything else.
State the truth and get labeled a troll. Liberals hate it when someone disagrees with them. They hate it more when someone disagrees with them and is correct and they are not.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Why should the US give a fsck about the climate in Paris... I predict severe smug storms, with heavy condescension.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
America was already behind on the Paris Agreements at the end of the Obama administration. We may be farther behind now, but we had not hit the target yet anyway.
I could not agree more...
nothing to see here - move along
If you are going to be dead before climate change becomes a problem, why should someone care?
Because "The Children"!!!
Yes, sure, you know more than NASA: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital...
But we have weather station all over the globe and many of then have public info... just go look and take the numbers, do the math and then come back to us if there isn't a small and persistent global temperature increase
Higuita
State the truth and get labeled a troll. Liberals hate it when someone disagrees with them. They hate it more when someone disagrees with them and is correct and they are not.
Being a classical democratic socialist, modern liberals are quite...liberal with how they define the truth. It's all arbitrary emotion, egoism, and oddly against liberalism: conformity. Analyze modern liberalism with that in mind and their actions are comprehensible.
What makes them feel good about themselves and their peer-group, what allows them to not be socially stigmatized while also retaining a feeling of moral superiority over people not part of their peer-group? That is the right question.
I see modern conservatives as being selfish, but based on reason. They can be reasoned with even when willfully ignorant of modern science. Not so with progressives. For them, its all about social status and emotion. Give them what they want, and they will criticize you for not giving more, feeling no sense obligation towards reciprocity and denouncing calls for responsibility.
in the eyes of near-future generations of people worldwide, including in the US mid-west desert-sandbasket (formerly breadbasket).
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Re: gradually slowing down (record-high) fossil fuel production and consumption will kill people - to paraphrase.
This is utter bullshit, and a talking-point dreamed up in the back rooms of the Koch brothers shill factory.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
yes, CO2 is good for plans... but that it is not its only effect... how many plants you have in Venus? They have LOTS of CO2 there! ...usually far away from the water was taken out... so you get longer or permanent dry seasons in some places and floods and strong cyclones. As some areas are hotter and other cooler, winds also change a little, taking hot air from hot places to places where usually is not that hot, and taking cold air to places where usually is not that cold... the planet will sooner or later get back to a "normal" weather cycle, but may be totally different from what we have now, so killing many animals and plants (species extinction) and destroying lots of land, forcing people to relocate, migrate... current food cultures will have to change, sparking for hunger if not changed correctly or too late.
the quantity is very important, too much or too little are bad, just like water (too little: desert, too much... well sea or lake)
The issue with CO2 is that it gets hot and do not release the hot as fast as most other common gases. This make everything a *little* more hot... while the extra CO2 make plans grow faster, it also make water evaporate faster, that in turn form bigger clouds and so stronger storms
The fun fact about chain reactions is that after they started, it is hard to predict how they will evolve, small details may make huge differences in the long run... and like most chain reactions, it may not be easy to stop or control then... venus is a great example of a global warming out of control, while mercuryis much closer to the sun, it is colder than venus: https://www.universetoday.com/...
Higuita
The report says:
"This report does not attempt to predict where US emissions will be in 2025."
The summary says:
"The US remains well behind pace to meet its commitments to cut greenhouse-gas emissions under the landmark Paris climate agreement. Under current policies, the nation will reduce climate pollution between 12 and 20 percent from 2005 levels by 2025"
In that all of the other 196 countries of the world have agreed to it (178 ratified), and the US looks like a spoiled kid in the corner having a tantrum.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
It's amazing how many people here are more concerned over the technicalities of not being part of the Paris Agreement versus the fact that we're fucking up our habitat and need to do better at fixing that, regardless of what group of people did or didn't sign what...
How about people who can't even spell "think"? How fucking dumb are they?
WE PULLED OUT of that mf agreement!
They are easy to spot
Under united states law the we are not bound by a treaty that was not ratified by congress no matter what the president at the time says.
I don't think this was and there is a reason the law is that way. partially to avoid this type of mess. Just because the president thinks it is a good idea, isn't good enough unless the legislative branch also agrees.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
what if you don't have any?
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
We know. You ass is HUGE and y'all got your heads ALL THE WAY up it.
Theyre still crying about 9-11 ffs. Pussies through and through.
if we focus on the outcomes, we can track it back to our behavior...
let the EPA do a good job, not a great job.. always room for improvement.
what we need is a constant flow of :: "free" clean air, water, and food, and housing, not necessarily in the order but all at the same time...we would be in heaven.
if our stupid congress and state leaders would prioritize on that.... and of course the other social woes might seem more easy to deal with...
let's get that right, and let the rest fall into place..
it seems we are all fighting after the same bait.... freedom of time to live freely....
let it be so, mtn 287
Not everyone wants to be a useless bump like Bush or Bush II.
Why do you public school grads always need everything explained to you? Give a hoot, read a book!
Yeah, CO2 is just wonderful. If you believe this to be true, then triple the amount of O2 in the air, and have it replace CO2. Breath that. See how you do.
So many people that do not understand how science works, yet, they still want to make ludicrous claims.
Trump and his Dominionist buddies/appointees don't give a flying fuck about the environment; wrecking the Earth faster means Zombie Jesus returns that much sooner so far as these nutjob religious extremists are concerned. In the meantime they want to hoard as much profit as they possibly can and wasting money on trying to combat human-caused global warming is just a non-starter to them. Besides which these rich bastards can afford to live in nice climate-controlled homes with purified air and water while they wait for the Rapture to come take them back to Heaven, why should they give a fuck about what the plebian sinner average citizens have to live like? The rest of us are all going to Hell so far as they're concerned anyway.
Don't you Trump supporters see it? Trump does not give a fuck about YOU any more than he gives a fuck about anyone else. He cares about his own ass first, then maybe his family, then maybe the sycophants he surrounds himself with (if they kissed his ass enough). The rest of us? We're just meat for the grinder to him and his cronies.
A better way to not be arrogant. How about this reasoning. There are many many people that study this issue. Most of them know a lot more about the fields involved then I do. ( chemistry, weather, hydraulics etc.) . The majority of them believe there is a real problem with how much plant food we are releasing and how it will effect things over time. That's pretty easy to establish, doesn't take a lot of hard science. Where to rubber meets the road though is , what if anything can and should we do about it. I personally don't think establishing arbitrary targets is a great way to go. It is kind of like deciding to loose weight by only counting calories.
I think we would be much better off if we focused on the environment as a social value, on building houses that fit in to the environment, on building whole communities that did less harm to the animals and plants and produced more natural and less harmful things. Then when we value that ,we can start looking at if there are more specific things to be done. Why power everything with solar and wind if we can? Why not? ( assuming it can be done in a way the increase personal freedom and health).
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
That’s incorrect and I’m not even American.
’On August 4, 2017, the Trump Administration delivered an official notice to the United Nations that the U.S. intends to withdraw from the Paris Agreement as soon as it is legally eligible to do so.[75] The formal notice of withdrawal cannot be submitted until the agreement is in force for 3 years for the US, in 2019.[76][77] In accordance with Article 28, as the agreement entered into force in the United States on 4 November 2016, the earliest possible effective withdrawal date for the United States is 4 November 2019.’
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement
It's all snake oil anyway...
Our President says so. He would never make up lies about such a thing.
https://twitter.com/realDonald...
Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
It sort of did. Rather than type it all out here's a link that describes the situation well https://www.snopes.com/news/20...
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Yea, apparently some of them want to be Movie stars.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Except it did. Here's why (since I'm lazy and don't want to type it out)
https://www.snopes.com/news/20...
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
And even if we were, we're doing better than the rest of the 1st world.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Why would Trump, who has no problems saying fuck you to anyone or anything, put off leaving the Paris Agreements until the agreed upon date if he didn't have to? I'm pretty sure he's got a few legal experts around him to help with stuff like that.
We are in the treaty. So I don't have to type everything out for you here is this https://www.snopes.com/news/20...
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
....but we don't have a commitment to the Paris Agreement.
The problem is, the models used to tell us we HAVE TO DO THIS PARIS ACCORD OR DIE! all get the temperature trends wrong. They don't line up with reality. So do we continue going on with actions based on flawed models, or do we just say "screw it" and start over? As Feynman so well stated, if data and your model disagree - the model is wrong.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
"The Pars [sic] agreement was nothing more than a attempt to grab money from developed countries..."
Well sure, if you are a climate change denier. That would be you, right? Right.
To a certain strain of political citizen, all work on climate change has some unspoken agenda, and cannot possibly have intrinsic value, or legitimacy. Tell me though, why did all those developed countries agree to this (alleged) cash grab? I mean, if it truly is a cash grab, we can understand the developing countries agreeing to it, but the developed countries? And in Paris of all places. That's in the developed world, so strange.
Oh I know. It's all Al Gore's fault right? Right. Him and that climate scientist guy. They sure must be persuasive though!
You keep capitalizing and bolding stuff like you know what you're talking about BUT YOU DON'T,/b>.
It isn't called the Paris Climate Treaty. You even type out the proper name multiple times. It is the Paris Climate Agreement. Words have meanings. Do you see the word treaty in there? Nope, it isn't a treaty, doesn't need to go to Congress, and this same line of reasoning was used by republitards for decades. You're just pissed you're getting a taste of your own medicine. Y'all hate that, I know.
I will give you a cunt hair's worth of credit though. The whole "everyone else needed to ratify it so we should have too" is a completely new strategy in my book. Never heard that one before from your side, but you obviously can't see the answer to your own damned question. Those other nations cared enough about it to ratify so that if they got replaced with their country's version of a trumptard nazi, they couldn't easily "quit" like we did.
The only thing we can agree on here is that it should have been ratified. We just have opposing reasons why. If it were ratified, we wouldn't be here bitching about it. It wasn't even attempted to be ratified because of your team's obstructionist agenda.
What's it like pumping gas?
Falling to levels still twice China's and maybe 10 times Indias. Helps when you have a tiny country. Why are your emissions much higher than Canada's again?
you can only be trolling with idiocy like that. per person you are just about the worst on the planet.
So what is the status of the last last chance to save the world and prevent the demise of all life on earth, the Kyoto Protocol?
Since the Paris Agreement is the follow one to the Kyoto Protocol we should be able to look back at the previous one and see why it did not save the world as we were told it would. How many countries in that made actual cuts needed to meet what they agreed to? If they cannot reach the cuts required under that agreement they must not have thought that the problem was that much of an actual issue and we can see how they act now.
like all the cannabis smokers, he didnt legalize it.
He didnt free all people in prison under pointless drug possession charges put there by over zealous career seeking prossecuters who love to ruin peoples lives and get rich.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
to declarations or war? Or are we just vacationing in Yemen (and the other 5 countries we're dropping bombs on w/o Congressional approval)?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Axing the Paris Climate Agreement is one of the best things Trump has done.
Like so many other things done by Mr "pen and a phone", this was NEVER ratified by the US Senate as a treaty... Obama did not even have the confidence to submit it to the Senate for consideration. As a result, the Paris deal, like the Iran deal, was just an agreement between Barack Hussein Obama and these international organizations. As long as he was running the executive branch of the US govt and the spineless congress did not interfere, Obama could order the various federal agencies to act as though these policies were law, but as soon as Mr Obama left office these policies were no longer operable.
The founders of the USA were very wary of a chief executive with too much unchecked power and thus made it impossible for one man to tie the country down - such serious international agreements require consent of the Senate (and any government actions needed to enforce require funding from the House).
The United States NEVER joined the Paris "accord" or the Iran "deal" (note: both use weasel words precisely because they are not treaties), only Barry Sotero did.
Do you have any idea what really happened? Russians weakened the Germans the most - you can look that up in several books, which you did not read. Americans, Canadians and Brits were among the ones who gave the final blow. And the Americans then said it was only them who did it, giving hardly any credit to the allies or the Russians. How many Americans did it take to rewrite history?
So if the USA can only win by cheating out of the Paris agreement and by rewriting history so it suits the USA best (America first), then I can just write you on a note what will happen next. China is a much stronger partner as it aims for a stable Eurasian and African continent to increase business opportunity - this is in high contrast with what "defense industry driven" USA is doing.
Are there other countries in the accord that are meeting their commitments? I'd be curious to see who is and isn't, and how they are doing it if they are.
It feels like the europeeons are trying to convince us that our government doesn't matter in the united states and we have to do what their government says. Or they're just in here carpet bombing to try to get people thinking we cant toss the agreement so they aren't the only ones getting screwed by the treaty they agreed to.
So you're saying the conditions on this Growing, Breathing, Ball of rock are not static. Got you. So whats bad about climate change then? Seems like that's what the globe wants...
--Highdude702(mods)
well, sorry to the people I modded that lost them..
No silly little boy, You have been shown over and over how it peaked in 2013. And your lie after lie were pointed out back then too.
Iv'e been pounding it into your head over and over that Chinese coal is more efficient than American coal and the new plants are more efficient than the old ones. Glad you are finally at long last starting to realise.
Though I never said they were twice as efficient, that's just complete stupidity you made up for yourself. Even your made up 1.5x is a complete joke of a number.
All you can ever do is lie and make shit up, don't you get tired of appearing so completely clueless and foolish at every turn?
You are so far out in front with respect to CO2 emissions per person that even if you dropped by 66%. Cut your emissions down to only 1/3 your current level. You would still be higher than the world average.
Let that sink in for a minute...
All your talk about decreasing by a fraction of a percent, or getting excited about a whole percentage point decrease means nothing in this context. America is "moving in the right direction" but way too slowly to make any difference to anything.
I like to think I'm helping save the planet by not having children..
....firebomb Paris before he complies with the Paris Agreements
Given that the current administration was elected on an anti-climate-change platform, this sounds actually pretty good. At least there will still be some reductions in pollution.
Better hope Scott Pruitt doesn't hear about this or he'll start just piling coal up in fields and setting it alight.
At best our climate agreements will delay the inevitable heat death of Planet Earth. Most every bit of available hydrocarbon in the crust of the Earth will eventually be burned and converted to CO2. Barring some amazing and improbable discoveries, humans will survive for a few hundred years before it all comes to an end.
Because at 100 billion a year, it's still way way cheaper than shutting down 2/3 of the US economy, which is what would be required to just drop back to the average CO2 levels of the rest of the world. If you don't want to kill off 200 million or so Americans or stop doing two thirds of everything you do, 100billion is peanuts.
Trump and his brain dead administration doesn't believe in climate change. That and that they pulled out because it was "a bad deal". Every deal that doesn't give the US everything for nothing in return is a bad deal for Trump, no compromise.
The globe is not producing extra CO2, we are...
Also, even if natural (a new ice age or a new warn age), it is a totally global change, that leads to the fall of many countries and regions, creating global instability and so famine, migrations, wars
Uf we can avoid all that by just investing in clean energy, it is a win-win situation
Higuita
It's also a simple question.
Isn't it?
OTOH, if Rhodium's estimates continue along their current pace of revision, the US will easily fulfill it's Paris climate obligations by 2025.