U.S. CO2 emissions dropping

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Chris, Dec 8, 2012.

  1. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    Environmental activists seem elated that the Obama administration may tackle climate change in its second term. In order to determine where climate change fits into the priority ranking of our nation’s most important agenda items, it seems worthwhile to step back and take stock of the quiet but tremendous progress that the U.S. has already made in reducing carbon emissions, and take a few moments to understand the underlying factors that are bringing about such benefits.

    In the first quarter of this year, U.S. carbon emissions hit a 20-year low. As Figure 1 below demonstrates, the U.S. has observed substantial reductions in CO2 emissions over the last five years. These reductions contrast with the increases in CO2 emissions that the Energy Information Administration forecasted in 1998 when the U.S. was considering committing to CO2 emissions reductions in the Kyoto Agreement. At the time of these discussions, the EIA estimated that CO2 emissions would increase at a rate of approximately 1.3 percent annually through 2020. In fact, to reach the Kyoto Agreement target for 2012, the U.S. would have needed to reduce CO2 emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels—to approximately 4,700 million metric tons.

    Fast forward to 2012: The U.S. achieved approximately 70% of the CO2 emissions reductions targeted under Kyoto (as compared to the 1998 EIA CO2 forecast). That’s substantial progress. A major factor in CO2 emission reduction is shale gas, which, with the continued displacement/retirement of coal plants, has the potential to provide even more CO2 reduction benefits in the future.

    Surprise Side Effect Of Shale Gas Boom: A Plunge In U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions - Forbes
     
  2. theHawk
    Offline

    theHawk Registered Conservative

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    10,901
    Thanks Received:
    2,072
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +5,789
    In other words we really didn't need to sign the agreement in order to lower emissions on our own.

    Bush was right.
     
  3. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,940
    Thanks Received:
    5,212
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,683
    When a Nations Manufacturing base shuts down and moves to China of course there will be fewer emissions here.

    "Greenhouse Gas" emissions are WAY UP in developing nations which more than compensates for what doesn't get spewed here.

    Developing Nations are exempt from any of those regulations.

    There's a reason for that.
     
  4. mamooth
    Offline

    mamooth Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2012
    Messages:
    13,708
    Thanks Received:
    2,449
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Ratings:
    +6,663
    Wait a sec. All the denialists swore the US economy would collapse and we'd all be living in caves if CO2 emissions were reduced in any way.

    Yet that didn't happen in any way. So, it seems the denialists got it totally wrong yet another time. Go fig.
     
  5. Politico
    Offline

    Politico Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    13,855
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,491
    GW butts must be puckering everywhere.
     
  6. flacaltenn
    Offline

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,110
    Thanks Received:
    4,668
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,385
    Boy -- you really MISSED the story here Chris.. Like Obama should be taking or given credit for this CO2 emission reduction..

    Actually -- the reduction has NOTHING TO DO with Obama policy and has happened quite in SPITE of admin policies. As you can find by digging up my thread from a month ago.. In there -- the REASON for the reduction is revealed. It's because of the dramatic market shift to NATURAL GAS as it gets more plentiful and cheaper. Combusts more completely with almost 1/2 the emissions of CO2.

    But hey --- thanks for TRYING to take credit for it and bashing Bush.. It's good for a chuckle..
     
  7. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,248
    Thanks Received:
    14,915
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +37,036
    So thats why there's been no global warming these past 16 years!
     
  8. flacaltenn
    Offline

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,110
    Thanks Received:
    4,668
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,385
  9. bigrebnc1775
    Offline

    bigrebnc1775 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    64,004
    Thanks Received:
    3,798
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Location:
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,830
    Damn this is a no brainier. CO2 emissions are dropping because less people don't have a job to drive too everyday.
     
  10. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    24,234
    Thanks Received:
    2,915
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +6,232


    What a dummy......................:D


    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]



    The denialists always point out.......as the UN pointed out earlier this year........that going green would cost with world 76 trillion dollars.:gay: Of course, as I astutely point out via use of the above graphs, that isnt happening...........not even close!!!:fu:


    The radicals continue to think they are winning due to the obsession with their science hoax...........but they're not.:9:
     

Share This Page