About Trumps withdrawl of the US from the Paris Climate Agreement

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-un-admits-that-the-paris-climate-deal-was-a-fraud/

The UN did a report and even if the entire thing went through as promised by all parties in the accord it would not have mattered anyway so why the big deal we pulled out of it, no one will do what is needed, especially developing economies that depend on coal power plants. My view Trump did the right thing.

 

The population and economy of the United States will continue to meet or exceed the standards set forth in that agreement anyway, regardless of attempts to derail it. The energy market has already shifted away from Coal/Carbon and technology will feed it steroids.

 

Right, 175 countries with the notable exception of only ONE signed the treaty.

So, of course, the treaty means nothing despite the fact that overwhelming scientific evidence proves what it is happening. Entire species of some animals are dieing out.

Whaddaya need for proof; half of Miami streets under water to believe what is happening? From National Geographic:


Bye, bye Marco Island and Lower Naples ...

 

That bit in red above is YOUR very uniquely subjective opinion ...

 

Several important countries refused to sign the Kyoto treaty. Several important countries refused to sign the Oslo treaty. The reason they refused to sign those treaties is because they at least did something. For all of you people running around talking about how everyone in the entire world signed this damned treaty did you ever bother to stop and ask why? Seriously? Its an answer I am still waiting for to this day.

Tell me specifically what about this treaty actually helps with AGW? The treaty is non-binding, left entirely up to every country to decide on their on in 13 years from now. Meanwhile we now have 13 years where nothing will get done because every country is going to say "Hey! We are good, see we signed this piece of paper and we will think about doing something in the year 2030. China nearly quadrupled its emissions in less than 13 years so what is the world going to look like in 2030 when China has increased even more and India also begins to rapidly produce more emissions?

The reason everyone signed this shitty treaty is precisely because now they can all pat themselves on the back for pretending to care about the environment while simultaneously kicking the can down the road for the next administration to deal with. Its actually an impressive feat of cognative dissonance.

 

The Wall Street/donor/"job creator" class prefers that and works to make it so.

 

PENTAGON REPORT: U.S. MILITARY CONSIDERS CLIMATE CHANGE A 'THREAT MULTIPLIER' THAT COULD EXACERBATE TERRORISM
http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

 

[According to the latest annual UN report on the "emissions gap," the Paris agreement will provide only a third of the cuts in greenhouse gas that environmentalists claim is needed to prevent catastrophic warming. If every country involved in those accords abides by their pledges between now and 2030 — which is a dubious proposition — temperatures will still rise by 3 degrees C by 2100. The goal of the Paris agreement was to keep the global temperature increase to under 2 degrees.] - copied from the article.

Lets see it didn't go far enough as an agreement and would need to go far further with nearly 100% compliance to do what the environmental community said needed to be done. Did you read the article we would need to go far further than the Paris Accords so they didn't mean much. I'm sure when the temperature reaches 3 degrees more and the environment worsens then the world is likely to act more decisively in a way it has to do so or more likely the US and other nations and nation blocs will protect their borders and adapt to climate change and let the rest of the world to take their chances.

Or renegotiate the treaty to be far more decisive with measure three to four times stricter this would demand massive changes to the way of life in major nations which would be politically and economically unpopular. For example tell Americans to convert their cars to electric power or not have a car, limit car ownership and making people use mass transit, or remodel communities so cars aren't needed at all, agriculture would change since meat production might be reduces forcing meat prices to rise and produce less milk raising those food prices as a likely focus since meat production is more polluting. So who thinks the world will go there until it is clear there is no choice?

 

https://www.google.com/amp/bigthink...ack-the-us-military-has-a-team-in-place-2.amp

What Happens If Hostile Aliens Attack? The US Military Has a Team in Place
June 7, 2017
by PHILIP PERRY

An alien invasion. Pixababy.
Scientists have all kinds of reasons why aliens won’t try to fly to Earth and enslave humanity. Even so, the US Military has a backup plan, just in case. Two Air Force teams, the 26th Space Aggressor Squadron (26th SAS) and the 527th Space Aggressor Squadron (527th SAS), are tasked with protecting assets in space, developing strategies to secure US space-based interests, and plans that involve deflecting extraterrestrial invaders. Both are based in Colorado.

 

The US military has plans for every dooms day scenario...they are not taking a chance...

 

China has cancelled the construction of over 200 coal fired power plants.. India has done the same.

People in W VA are refusing retraining because Trump told them coal jobs are coming back. That stupid, rat bastard doesn't know that coal mining jobs have been declining steadily since 1950.

 

Any cockamamie scheme that will allow the concentration of societal wealth into private corporate hands is fair game for “defense” and to “protect the american people”, be afraid, very very afraid.

 

The coal industry was so wonderful for Appalachia, man, all that "development".

 

Wait didn't you just imply the US military considers global warming a threat and must be delt with?

Or do you just pick and choose what you are scared about and post propaganda?

 

Yea declining because of automation/ technology , all jobs are like that..

 

Now that's some funny **** there, I don't care who you are. I can see why you would hope no one knows the difference between what the military says concerns them versus political driven spending bills and corporate handouts that the military says it does not need and/or want.

 

Someone oughtta tell Don.

 

LOLOL.. name the countries.

 

So let me get your thoughts in check, you are ok with the military spending billions on global warming (that always happens) , yet you don't want them to spend billions on an alien invasion that could happen first?

 

It's pretty public; those who do not know most likely do not want to know. The same concept applies to nuclear disarmament. The most staunch opponent is the one who has used them to devastate civilian populations.

 

Not if the "don" reverses the regulations..we are up to our eye balls in cheap coal, good for at least 400 years..

 

All I did was post a link as to a military position; their assessment. Please alert us upon your next UFO sighting.

 

What will you do with it, burn it in your oven to keep warm?

 

Don't be naive they only stopped those because they overestimated capacity.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ion-on-coal-fired-power-plants-in-15-regions/

"China will stop the construction of coal-fired power plants in 15 regions as part of its efforts to tackle a capacity glut in the sector, the country's energy regulator said on Thursday, confirming an earlier media report.

The Southern Energy Observer, a magazine run by the state-owned China Southern Power Grid Corp, said regulators had halted the construction of coal-fired plants in regions where capacity was already in surplus, including the major coal producing centres of Inner Mongolia, Shanxi and Shaanxi."

"Environmental group Greenpeace said the rules, if fully implemented, could involve up to 250 power projects with a total of 170 gigawatts (GW) in capacity, according to initial estimates.

"China is finally beginning to clamp down on its out of control coal power bubble," said Lauri Myllyvirta, Greenpeace's senior campaigner on coal, in an emailed statement.
However, these new measures fall far short of even halting the build-up of overcapacity in coal-fired power generation, let alone beginning to reduce it," he said.

http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/india-triple-co2-emissions-new-climate-commitment/

"According to the International Energy Agency, coal is expected to increase from 43 percent of India’s total energy supply today to 46 percent in 2020 and 51 percent in 2035 and to maintain 68 percent of the electricity generation market as its demand grows."

India is going to increase its reliance on coal not decrease.

Also, precisely because I am a huge nuclear power proponent I do not find this extremely rapid pace of construction of new reactors to be anything less than alarming. China can't build anything safe or long lasting. What will happen and I am 100% sure it will happen, is that there were be several monumental nuclear related accidents resulting in massive bad publicity for nuclear power in general and then all of a sudden we will be unable to build any new reactors in this country because everyone will be afraid of nuclear again.