Word is born

[catatomic]

Just a few minutes ago I heard on conservative iheart Utah;s Big Talker in UT that Donald Trump said to the NY Times that global warming was somewhat linked to humans and he is considering staying with the global climate accord and not yanking it!

It's never over until it's over!

 

[Crick]

Besides being an amoral idiot and fool, Trump's a complete will of the wisp. He doesn't seem to actually have a principle in his body. I hope the Trump voters here learn the cost of putting unadulterated ignorance into the Oval Office.

 

[catatomic]

With or without the U.S., the world’s going to move forward on climate change

 

[Crick]

But if without the US, the effectiveness of their efforts will be seriously weakened. We are a large source that, under Trump, are likely to grow larger.

 

[ding]

But if without the US, the effectiveness of their efforts will be seriously weakened. We are a large source that, under Trump, are likely to grow larger.

Bullshit. In 2013 the US emitted 5.8 billion tons of CO2. This is 15% of the world's 39.8 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Based on the last 12 years, the US has been decreasing their CO2 emissions by 0.03 billion tons per year. At this rate, by the year 2030, the US's CO2 emissions will fall to 5.2 billion tons of CO2 per year. US emissions could go to zero and the rest of the world would replace it in 5 short years.

 

[Crick]

And you don't think 15% is significant?

Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions

And what sort of engineer are you?

 

[ding]

And you don't think 15% is significant?

Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions

And what sort of engineer are you?

Not in the context of the trends I don't.

 

[Crick]

And what is it about the trends that make you think the US contribution, either for good or bad, is irrelevant? Certainly, if our contribution is irrelevant, any nation's contribution is irrelevant. Is that what you believe?

I hope your employer doesn't let you near the budget.

 

[ding]

And what is it about the trends that make you think the US contribution, either for good or bad, is irrelevant? Certainly, if our contribution is irrelevant, any nation's contribution is irrelevant. Is that what you believe?

I hope your employer doesn't let you near the budget.

First of all I don't see a problem like you do. Secondly, if there was a problem, we aren't it. Our emissions have been declining for the past 14 years. Population growth is responsible for the 1 billion tons per year of new emissions.

 

[Crick]

The increased use of fossil fuels in the third world is also responsible for some of that increase. As deniers here frequently remind us. China has been building coal fired power plants at a breakneck rate. India has dramatically increased the number of cars it uses. There are causes independent of population growth.

BTW, if you don't see a problem in increased GHG emissions and are unable to take than into account when expressing your opinion on this specific question, perhaps you shouldn't be voicing an opinion on this topic in the first place.

 

[ding]

The increased use of fossil fuels in the third world is also responsible for some of that increase. As deniers here frequently remind us. China has been building coal fired power plants at a breakneck rate. India has dramatically increased the number of cars it uses. There are causes independent of population growth.

You think? Thank you captain obvious. That's what I have been trying to tell you.

BTW, if you don't see a problem in increased GHG emissions and are unable to take than into account when expressing your opinion on this specific question, perhaps you shouldn't be voicing an opinion on this topic in the first place.

You do realize that you asked for my comment in post #8, right?

 

[Crick]

I don't believe you have. All your comments that I've noted blamed it all on population increase.

 

[ding]

Just a few minutes ago I heard on conservative iheart Utah;s Big Talker in UT that Donald Trump said to the NY Times that global warming was somewhat linked to humans and he is considering staying with the global climate accord and not yanking it!

It's never over until it's over!

CO2 emissions are certainly linked to human beings.

The primary reason CO2 emission are increasing is that the earth's population is increasing. Per capita CO2 emission has leveled off at about 5 metric tons per person. World CO2 emissions continue to increase by 960 million metric tons per year. The increase is driven by population growth; not per capita usage. The population growth is occurring in the lower socioeconomic regions of the planet which is where CO2 emission growth is occurring.