Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

[Handyman]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

Cities Tell Trump to Get Bent

Well Trump has certainly turned this on their head. The GOP cant stop expanding the government and the Dems are going more local to get the job done.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

What's also scary on more of a shorter wavelength than climate change is that the US is quickly losing its place in the world. The EU and China are striking deals. They're beginning to wonder if the US needs to be involved.

Sure, Kepler is going to say that this is a good thing, but I'd rather like to maintain our place in the world as a leader. That leadership has gotten us to this point. We are as prosperous as we are because of it.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

What's also scary on more of a shorter wavelength than climate change is that the US is quickly losing its place in the world. The EU and China are striking deals. They're beginning to wonder if the US needs to be involved.

Sure, Kepler is going to say that this is a good thing, but I'd rather like to maintain our place in the world as a leader. That leadership has gotten us to this point. We are as prosperous as we are because of it.

It's a problem because we can't be trusted anymore. Obama got an (largely undeserved) Noble Prize because the world was so glad to have adults in Washington. Then bratty teenagers got into Congress and we elected a toddler. Even if we get an adult back in 2020, it's inevitable that it tilts back again as long as the Republicans act like this.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

What's also scary on more of a shorter wavelength than climate change is that the US is quickly losing its place in the world. The EU and China are striking deals. They're beginning to wonder if the US needs to be involved.

Sure, Kepler is going to say that this is a good thing

Show me where I ever said this was a good thing. I say it is a survivable thing. Other places have been the city on the hill before us, and others will after us. Obviously, I'd prefer that we were exceeded by others moving ahead of us, not by us dropping behind. But as long as we don't blow the world up in our death throes we are entirely expendable. We might turn out to be just a rocket booster stage. The only thing that matters is getting the payload safely off this rock before the apes destroy it.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

I probably worded it poorly.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

Funny that Trump tweeted he represents the people of Pittsburgh not Paris which is then responded to by the Mayor of Pittsburgh that they will do everything they can to follow the Paris Accord

In other news both Bob Iger and Elon Musk have left that stupid business committee Trump pretended to care about over this and even the CEO of Goldman Sachs said this is bad decision. Nicely done Donald

And sorry I dont ever want to see America not take the lead because I dont trust anyone else to do so. For all our faults I will take us over the other countries almost all the time.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

I'll confess that I don't know as much about this Paris agreement as I probably should, but isn't it correct that this agreement was one that Obama himself was able to agree to? That is, it's not really a treaty or anything that had to be approved by Congress and that is now undone?

It obviously seems like a stupid move on Trump's part, but is there going to be anything realistically that would prevent the next President, or even Trump himself next week, from just saying "we're back in?"

I agree it seems like a good idea to get working on climate issues sooner rather than later, but realistically isn't the primary problem created by Trump's move more of a "public appearance" problem to the rest of the world as opposed to long term damage to the environment, assuming a sane person takes control of the wheel here four years from now?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

I'll confess that I don't know as much about this Paris agreement as I probably should, but isn't it correct that this agreement was one that Obama himself was able to agree to? That is, it's not really a treaty or anything that had to be approved by Congress and that is now undone?

It obviously seems like a stupid move on Trump's part, but is there going to be anything realistically that would prevent the next President, or even Trump himself next week, from just saying "we're back in?"

I agree it seems like a good idea to get working on climate issues sooner rather than later, but realistically isn't the primary problem created by Trump's move more of a "public appearance" problem to the rest of the world as opposed to long term damage to the environment, assuming a sane person takes control of the wheel here four years from now?

Any international agreement to involve action by the United States, by definition, is a treaty. According to the Constitution, international treaties must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate. Obama only signed by executive order; he did not get the Senate involved. Other parties may view the signing by the executive branch (whether President or Secretary of State, as John Kerry had signed a few things when he was around) as binding, but the United States, by their own Constitutional authority, does not. What Trump is effectively doing is issuing an executive order to confirm the United States' legal status that the treaty is not recognized. Juncker can say what he wants, try to convince the five protesting mayors to give money to the setup, and put down whatever sanctions he wishes, but at the end of the day, the United States has never officially been a part of that accord.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

What's really odd about this whole thing is the "jobs" part.

It's pretty clear that there's an emerging market for making solar and wind power systems which is driving an industry to create jobs.

But people would rather go into a big hole in the ground, dig that up, and do that for 8 hours a day vs. working in a clean plant, above ground, where the market is growing. China is moving fast on that, we know that. And in reply to China and letting them have the entire market, we say yes. A very loud yes. Great for future jobs in the US.

What's up with that?

Some people don't seem to understand that their families MOVED to the mines and mills from other places where jobs were scarce. And doing that now is still feasible.

Once again, people have no idea that good regulations drive jobs. A lot of them. This one is yet another good example of a job creating regulation. But digging dirty rocks out of the ground is more appealing.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

What's really odd about this whole thing is the "jobs" part.

It's pretty clear that there's an emerging market for making solar and wind power systems which is driving an industry to create jobs.

But people would rather go into a big hole in the ground, dig that up, and do that for 8 hours a day vs. working in a clean plant, above ground, where the market is growing. China is moving fast on that, we know that. And in reply to China and letting them have the entire market, we say yes. A very loud yes. Great for future jobs in the US.

What's up with that?

Some people don't seem to understand that their families MOVED to the mines and mills from other places where jobs were scarce. And doing that now is still feasible.

Once again, people have no idea that good regulations drive jobs. A lot of them. This one is yet another good example of a job creating regulation. But digging dirty rocks out of the ground is more appealing.

Nobody's saying cut solar and wind, aside from maybe some belief that shady corporatists exist, whether they do or not. What's to say you can't do both? After all, wouldn't that create even more opportunity? Or is the real goal here to force the hand?

There's not a good market for solar in our current state, as we found out with taxpayer-propped Solyndra, as well as other heavily subsidized companies in the industry, going belly up. Unfortunately, some of that has to do with mandates that power companies have been able to negotiate with legislatures to force people onto a grid instead of producing their own power. Believe it or not, solar is feasible in a number of markets under the right conditions. It might not be as feasible in a skylined concrete jungle, but rurally and in the suburbs, it would, not to mention if someone wished to live in the middle of nowhere with electricity. Aside from Agenda 21, why would we not embrace decentralization and achieve both of our goals? Heck, wouldn't the decentralization also create the need for mechanics and create *GASP* more jobs?

I'm not much of a fan of wind. Aside from needing the correct conditions, it doesn't produce nearly enough power to offset the amount of room needed, not to mention the NIMBY unpopularity with noise pollution.

 

[burd]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

What's really odd about this whole thing is the "jobs" part.

It's pretty clear that there's an emerging market for making solar and wind power systems which is driving an industry to create jobs.

But people would rather go into a big hole in the ground, dig that up, and do that for 8 hours a day vs. working in a clean plant, above ground, where the market is growing. China is moving fast on that, we know that. And in reply to China and letting them have the entire market, we say yes. A very loud yes. Great for future jobs in the US.

What's up with that?

Some people don't seem to understand that their families MOVED to the mines and mills from other places where jobs were scarce. And doing that now is still feasible.

Once again, people have no idea that good regulations drive jobs. A lot of them. This one is yet another good example of a job creating regulation. But digging dirty rocks out of the ground is more appealing.

Caves, fittingly.

 

[walrus]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

So Exxon wanted Trump to stay with the Paris accord. Suddenly they have conscious?


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Handyman]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

So Exxon wanted Trump to stay with the Paris accord. Suddenly they have conscious?


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No...they just know what the core is. Exxon has been doing research into Climate Change since I think the 1970s. They told Trump months ago not to back out of the Paris Accord because they know the future is not in oil. Unlike him they are smart businessmen and women and they want to be part of the cutting edge.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

So Exxon wanted Trump to stay with the Paris accord. Suddenly they have conscious?


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Exxon is pure globalist. Plus, they want all their product to go to China.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

Nobody's saying cut solar and wind, aside from maybe some belief that shady corporatists exist, whether they do or not. What's to say you can't do both? After all, wouldn't that create even more opportunity? Or is the real goal here to force the hand?

There's not a good market for solar in our current state, as we found out with taxpayer-propped Solyndra, as well as other heavily subsidized companies in the industry, going belly up. Unfortunately, some of that has to do with mandates that power companies have been able to negotiate with legislatures to force people onto a grid instead of producing their own power. Believe it or not, solar is feasible in a number of markets under the right conditions. It might not be as feasible in a skylined concrete jungle, but rurally and in the suburbs, it would, not to mention if someone wished to live in the middle of nowhere with electricity. Aside from Agenda 21, why would we not embrace decentralization and achieve both of our goals? Heck, wouldn't the decentralization also create the need for mechanics and create *GASP* more jobs?

I'm not much of a fan of wind. Aside from needing the correct conditions, it doesn't produce nearly enough power to offset the amount of room needed, not to mention the NIMBY unpopularity with noise pollution.

Nobody's saying to cut it?

That's not the issue.

The issue is that given the choice between buying power stuff from the US or buying it from China, don just flipped off the world telling them to buy it someplace else, because we want to burn rocks.

And you really expect companies to pour money into a market that we don't want to be world leaders in? I can't see that happening.

Again, don got nervous that China was starting to lead this new market, so instead of doubling down and taking the lead back, he handed it to China. Great for future jobs.

Solandra was a wet dream for people like you- pretending that government support is bad, because it will lead to corruption- burying your head in the sand for the amount of waste, for the sake of profit, that private funding does, too. ONE example of something bad does not define an industry.

And NOBODY is bringing up the future of nuclear power. Where we could have lead the world, and made a lot of money, but we would rather burn rocks.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

I'll confess that I don't know as much about this Paris agreement as I probably should, but isn't it correct that this agreement was one that Obama himself was able to agree to? That is, it's not really a treaty or anything that had to be approved by Congress and that is now undone?

It obviously seems like a stupid move on Trump's part, but is there going to be anything realistically that would prevent the next President, or even Trump himself next week, from just saying "we're back in?"

I agree it seems like a good idea to get working on climate issues sooner rather than later, but realistically isn't the primary problem created by Trump's move more of a "public appearance" problem to the rest of the world as opposed to long term damage to the environment, assuming a sane person takes control of the wheel here four years from now?

What makes Trump's move even more stupid is that most of the blue states and virtually every major company in the US have already signed onto a pledge to comply. Companies aren't going to wait for the government to sign on to these things. They see that the global market is moving this way and there is an asston of money to be made in renewable energy.

All this move did was make us look like cavemen, weaken our leadership position in the world, and almost certainly harm our economy.

 

[burd]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

Good thing none of the big players in the fossil fuel industry are "globalists" or 1%ers.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

Nobody's saying to cut it?

That's not the issue.

The issue is that given the choice between buying power stuff from the US or buying it from China, don just flipped off the world telling them to buy it someplace else, because we want to burn rocks.

And you really expect companies to pour money into a market that we don't want to be world leaders in? I can't see that happening.

Again, don got nervous that China was starting to lead this new market, so instead of doubling down and taking the lead back, he handed it to China. Great for future jobs.

Solandra was a wet dream for people like you- pretending that government support is bad, because it will lead to corruption- burying your head in the sand for the amount of waste, for the sake of profit, that private funding does, too. ONE example of something bad does not define an industry.

And NOBODY is bringing up the future of nuclear power. Where we could have lead the world, and made a lot of money, but we would rather burn rocks.

So the real goal is to force the hand. And I don't know if you noticed, but the Paris accords don't apply to China. They can and will burn all the rocks they want.

If you want a country to fail, attack its energy.

And I see once again, you're trying to make the country choose between an undiscovered nuclear fusion and fossil fuels. Again, you are attempting to force the hand of non-fossil-fuels, and you have no problem destroying the country in order to achieve it.

 

[French Rage]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

And I don't know if you noticed, but the Paris accords don't apply to China.

Wait, so China doesn't have an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution? That's news to, let's see, literally everyone.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Climate Change 2: Thank God for Global Warming

China is also well ahead of their agreed to goals.