Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Trump bailed on the Paris climate crap...Smart

  1. #1
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wreckless driving on dirty back roads
    Posts
    8,959

    Trump bailed on the Paris climate crap...Smart

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/leaders-j...020349888.html

    Seems the banks are in on the attempt to force the world to do their bidding.
    But we knew this when algore started all the carbon tax business's.
    While no one ever listens to me,
    I am constantly being told to be quiet.

    In a world of snowflakes,
    be the heat..

  2. #2
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    10,403
    Update:

    With the world and the left choking on their own CO2 emissions, complaining about Trump bailing on the Paris Climate lies, the USA cuts emissions while those who signed Paris are polluting more!!!!

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...-policies.html

  3. #3
    Senior Member Full Otto's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,496
    Quote Originally Posted by imanaknut View Post
    Update:

    With the world and the left choking on their own CO2 emissions, complaining about Trump bailing on the Paris Climate lies, the USA cuts emissions while those who signed Paris are polluting more!!!!

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...-policies.html
    That's been going on since the acid rain days back in the 70's
    A problem that we worked on by correcting our sulfur emmissions but eastern Europe got a break due to cost
    People there would spend time in old mines to get better air from coal generating plants

    I also remember the 2007 Bush era climate change meeting in Bali
    https://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...al-765583.html
    President Bush's administration conceded for the first time yesterday that the pollution that causes global warming will have to be cut in half around the globe by the middle of the century if the world is to avoid dangerous climate change.

    The verbal concession, a dramatic U-turn, came amid unprecedented pressure on the United States in the closing session of the top-level climate conference in Bali. In scenes never before witnessed in international diplomacy, the US was booed and hissed by the representatives of nearly 190 nations for trying to obstruct agreement.
    ....................
    It has stuck in my mind because of :
    Kevin Conrad, the Papuan ambassador of environment and climate change, told the US. "If you're not going to lead, get out of the way." And the hall erupted in applause.
    ....................
    All they wanted was the money
    I was was able to find this clip of it

    For peace of mind, resign as general manager of the universe

  4. #4
    Senior Member Justin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,079
    https://www.foxnews.com/science/no-v...AN2y0T7E-ZSp3A

    In a year that saw a pair of destructive hurricanes and a massive winter storm, there was one thing that did not touch down in 2018: a single violent tornado.

    Tornadoes are rated on a scale from EF-0 to EF-5, with 5 being the strongest with winds of over 200 mph and "incredible," damage, according to to the National Weather Service.


    In order to be classified as a "violent tornado," the ranking must be an EF-4 with winds between 166 and 200 mph, or an EF-5.

    No violent tornadoes ended up touching down in 2018, which made it the first since modern record-keeping began in 1950 that no violent twisters were reported, according to FOX23.

    The Washington Post noted that it was a quiet year for tornados overall, with below-normal numbers reported during the peak season of March to May due to unfavorable weather conditions.

    There were also fewer tornado-related deaths in 2018 than average. Nine tornadoes were responsible for 10 deaths, according to the National Weather Service's Storm Prediction Center.

    Data from the NWS shows on average there are typically 69 tornado deaths in the U.S.

    MOST DAMAGING HURRICANES AND STORMS OF 2018

    Even though tornados of any intensity can be deadly, those ranked between EF-3 to EF-5 have historically been responsible for most of the deaths in the U.S., the Weather Channel notes.

    Two people were killed in November after part of an Amazon distribution warehouse collapsed as a tornado tore through Baltimore.

    In July, a newborn was killed and more than 100 structures were destroyed when a tornado tore through a North Dakota city, turning an RV park into a field of twisted metal and debris.






    I thought Climate Change was going to cause an apocalypse? The whole Climate Change issue is really just a left wing scare tactic, and an attempt to grab money from the tax payers IMO. That's not to say that we shouldn't try and take care of the environment as much as we can, but don't tax/over regulate factories to the point where the companies will simply go and pollute all they want in China.

  5. #5
    Team Guns Network Silver 04/2013 alismith's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    44th "Free" State
    Posts
    11,203
    Just curious, is China part of the Climate Change entourage?
    "Valar morghulis; valar dohaeris."

    "Never say, "gun control" but instead say, "victim disarmament." - L Neil Smith

    Making good people helpless won't make bad people harmless.

    Freedom isn't free.

    "Attitude is the paintbrush that colors our world." TV Series, Haven.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Justin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,079
    Quote Originally Posted by alismith View Post
    Just curious, is China part of the Climate Change entourage?
    From what I remember, China signed the treaty but it was really just a promise not to pollute the world anymore than it already currently is projected to be doing. Obama and the western nations happily agreed to it, because they're really interested in telling the world, "Hey I'm helping," and they want to get that tax revenue.

    https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-e...aris-agreement

    Nothing horrifies the intelligentsia more than President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change. But, based on new information on China’s emissions, it increasingly looks like the president made the right call.

    Just last week, an analysis from Greenpeace indicated that China’s 2018 carbon emissions were on track to grow at the fastest rate in six years. The study, based on government data regarding the use of coal and other energy sources, shows carbon output rising 4 percent in the first quarter of this year. Analysts are projecting similar gains over the next several quarters.

    The weakness of the Paris Agreement was that it was lopsided, requiring little from China and a great deal from the U.S. President Obama committed the United States to reducing carbon emissions in 2025 by 26 to 28 percent, which would have meant a substantial jump in electricity costs.

    By contrast, China committed to boosting non-fossil fuels to around 20 percent of its overall energy mix by 2030 (a project already underway) and a “hope” that emissions might peak at that time. As one analyst commented in the New York Times, “What China is pledging to do here is not a lot different from what China’s policies are on track to deliver.”

    As vague as its goals were, it is becoming clear that the country is unlikely to meet them. To do so would require sacrificing growth to rein in pollution. Since the Chinese Communist Party has pledged to double China’s 2010 GDP by 2020 and to create a “moderately prosperous society” by 2021, that is extremely unlikely.

    Fans of the Paris accord have proudly noted that China’s emissions flattened between 2014 and 2016. But that reported hiatus in Beijing’s long-term carbon growth occurred during a period of economic deceleration. In 2017, with a renewed push for industrial investment and output, emissions again began to grow.

    China is key. It is by far the world’s biggest source of carbon emissions, producing more than one quarter of the global total and 81 percent more than the United States. The U.S. is the second-largest; India a distant third.

    Unlike China, emissions from the United States have trended lower in recent years. The peak occurred in 2005; overall net emissions in 2016 were 12.1-percent lower than in 2005, and the International Energy Agency reports another drop in 2017.

    The main driver of lower emissions in the U.S. has been increased substitution of natural gas for coal in producing electric power. Cleaner natural gas became increasingly competitive with cheap coal thanks to widespread use of newly improved hydraulic fracking techniques.

    The United States also implemented higher fuel economy standards for automobiles, but the impact from that measure has been far more limited. Emissions in the electric power sector dropped 25 percent between 2005 and 2016, from 2,401 million metric tons (mmt) to 1,809 mmt.

    In transportation, the decline was a more modest 4 percent, from 1,856 mmt to 1,783 mmt. In 2017, according to the IEA, increased use of renewables for power generation was a key contributor to the decline in U.S. emissions.

    By contrast, in China, coal use has trended higher recently, driving emissions up. Coal consumption, according to Beijing’s own (questionable) statistics, rose 0.4 percent in 2017, producing some backpedaling among those optimistic about China’s compliance with the Paris accord. Others estimate the increase at between 1 percent and 5 percent.

    It is difficult to know, given China’s history of fudging the numbers. In the lead-up to the Paris talks, for instance, it became obvious that China was burning 17 percent more coal than it had admitted, a variance the New York Times described as “immense."

    Make no mistake: China is indeed attempting to reduce the blinding pollution that makes its major cities almost uninhabitable and that routinely shuts down its airports. Officials are ramping up the use of renewables and nuclear power, and they are trying to reduce their power sector’s reliance on coal.

    This is not because of President Xi Jinping’s commitment to the Paris Agreement; it is because for several years there have been escalating (illegal) protests about the foul air and water that the political elites in Beijing and Shanghai have been forced to endure.

    In a 2015 poll by Pew Research Center, three-quarters of Chinese respondents listed air and water pollution as “very” or “moderately” big problems; only “corrupt officials” ranked higher.

    China’s supposed commitment to global emissions reductions is undermined by its sponsorship of coal elsewhere. The Natural Resources Defense Council reports that between 2013 and 2016, Beijing spent $15 billion building coal plants outside of China, mainly in countries included in its "One Belt, One Road" project. Another $13 billion is on tap for similar projects.

    Eager to score a foreign policy achievement, Obama committed to promises that could have been met only by retarding U.S. growth.

    In his speech announcing his withdrawal, President Trump cited a study by National Economic Research Associates that claimed the Paris Agreement would cost the U.S. 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025, including 440,000 in manufacturing and nearly $3 trillion in lost GDP by 2040. All, according to the study, for a 0.2-degree Celsius change in global warming by the year 2100.

    Most important, it would have required the U.S. to hobble one of its greatest competitive weapons: its vibrant fossil fuel industries.

    China President Xi Jinping was undoubtedly enthusiastic about a deal that demanded few sacrifices by China but that would have cost America dearly in terms of lost growth and income.

    When he said at the start of last fall’s 19th party congress: “No one should expect China to swallow anything that undermines its interests,” he could have been referring to the Paris accord.

    Beijing embraces a “China First” view of the world. Thank heavens the U.S. finally has a president who puts his country’s interests first as well.

  7. #7
    Team GunsNet Platinum 02/2014 Hatedbysheeple's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin View Post
    https://www.foxnews.com/science/no-v...AN2y0T7E-ZSp3A

    In a year that saw a pair of destructive hurricanes and a massive winter storm, there was one thing that did not touch down in 2018: a single violent tornado.

    Tornadoes are rated on a scale from EF-0 to EF-5, with 5 being the strongest with winds of over 200 mph and "incredible," damage, according to to the National Weather Service.


    In order to be classified as a "violent tornado," the ranking must be an EF-4 with winds between 166 and 200 mph, or an EF-5.

    No violent tornadoes ended up touching down in 2018, which made it the first since modern record-keeping began in 1950 that no violent twisters were reported, according to FOX23.

    The Washington Post noted that it was a quiet year for tornados overall, with below-normal numbers reported during the peak season of March to May due to unfavorable weather conditions.

    There were also fewer tornado-related deaths in 2018 than average. Nine tornadoes were responsible for 10 deaths, according to the National Weather Service's Storm Prediction Center.

    Data from the NWS shows on average there are typically 69 tornado deaths in the U.S.

    MOST DAMAGING HURRICANES AND STORMS OF 2018

    Even though tornados of any intensity can be deadly, those ranked between EF-3 to EF-5 have historically been responsible for most of the deaths in the U.S., the Weather Channel notes.

    Two people were killed in November after part of an Amazon distribution warehouse collapsed as a tornado tore through Baltimore.

    In July, a newborn was killed and more than 100 structures were destroyed when a tornado tore through a North Dakota city, turning an RV park into a field of twisted metal and debris.






    I thought Climate Change was going to cause an apocalypse? The whole Climate Change issue is really just a left wing scare tactic, and an attempt to grab money from the tax payers IMO. That's not to say that we shouldn't try and take care of the environment as much as we can, but don't tax/over regulate factories to the point where the companies will simply go and pollute all they want in China.
    Was just an EF-3 that hit my hometown on Dec 1st, and luckily no one died, but it was a half mile wide. I think climate change is bullshit as well, but just wind intensity is a weird line to draw when diameter, distance, and duration are just as if not more important.


    Last edited by Hatedbysheeple; 01-02-2019 at 09:40 PM.
    Initial Success or Total Failure

    "Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they're so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact"
    Gen. James 'Mad Dog' Mattis

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •