US officially rejoins Paris Agreement - Rejoice

[OldLady]

Carry on chewing crayons kids, the adults are in charge now.

Been a while since I looked it up, but last time I did, the US was exceeding the reductions mandated by Paris...and we didn't even belong to it.

Matter of fact, we're the only Western nation meeting or beating the mandated reductions.

Y'all need to get your shit together.

We are one of the highest CO2 contributors on the planet, so I guess those emission standards aren't doing the trick. We're doing better, though, despite the right screeching and hollering about wind turbines freezing in Texas.

 

[Flash]

China Joe is giving more welfare to China than this Paris Climate Agreement Environmental Wacko scam.

Today President Dufus announced he was going to resume funding WHO, another way to shovel money to China.

Anybody that voted for Biden is a ******* moron.

 

[OldLady]

At some point, we have to start thinking globally. It's the only planet we've got and it will take most of us working in the same direction to protect it.

 

[Weatherman2020]

US officially rejoins Paris Agreement - Rejoice

How is this beneficial to the United States?

It's more a planetary thing. We've only got one and we all share it; what one country does affects the rest because we can't section off the atmosphere or the oceans. Setting goals and sharing some resources to clean up our act globally benefits us as an inhabitant of the planet.

Is that why France refuses to follow the Paris agreement?

You ever try to plan and organize a company picnic or party? You'll never get 100% consensus, but the show goes on while the grumblers grumble. For the past 4 years, we were a grumbler while most of the world tried to work toward a common goal. Now we're back, and I'm glad.

Under Trump America EXCEEDED the Paris agreement while FRANCE SAID SCREW IT.

 

[OldLady]

Today President Dufus announced he was going to resume funding WHO, another way to shovel money to China.

WHO isn't connected to China.

 

[Weatherman2020]

At some point, we have to start thinking globally. It's the only planet we've got and it will take most of us working in the same direction to protect it.

Is that why Democrats love the ChiComs, because they’re so good with environmental issues?

 

[OldLady]

US officially rejoins Paris Agreement - Rejoice

How is this beneficial to the United States?

It's more a planetary thing. We've only got one and we all share it; what one country does affects the rest because we can't section off the atmosphere or the oceans. Setting goals and sharing some resources to clean up our act globally benefits us as an inhabitant of the planet.

Is that why France refuses to follow the Paris agreement?

You ever try to plan and organize a company picnic or party? You'll never get 100% consensus, but the show goes on while the grumblers grumble. For the past 4 years, we were a grumbler while most of the world tried to work toward a common goal. Now we're back, and I'm glad.

Under Trump America EXCEEDED the Paris agreement while FRANCE SAID SCREW IT.

Again, so what that France said screw it? No country is currently living up to its lofty goals, but we have goals for a reason.

 

[OldLady]

At some point, we have to start thinking globally. It's the only planet we've got and it will take most of us working in the same direction to protect it.

Is that why Democrats love the ChiComs, because they’re so good with environmental issues?

I don't know where you get the idea Dems love China. It's drivel.

 

[B. Kidd]

At some point, we have to start thinking globally. It's the only planet we've got and it will take most of us working in the same direction to protect it.

Is that why Democrats love the ChiComs, because they’re so good with environmental issues?

China was smart. They bribed individual entities and individuals like the NBA, University/Colleges via Confucious Institute's and Joe & Hunter and God knows who else!

 

[OldLady]

At some point, we have to start thinking globally. It's the only planet we've got and it will take most of us working in the same direction to protect it.

Is that why Democrats love the ChiComs, because they’re so good with environmental issues?

China was smart. They bribed individual entities and individuals like the NBA, University/Colleges via Confucious Institute's and Joe & Hunter and God knows who else!

Uh huh.

 

[Flash]

Today President Dufus announced he was going to resume funding WHO, another way to shovel money to China.

WHO isn't connected to China.

I know you Moon Bats are uneducated and low information because you get you news from CNN but it was WHO that ran cover for China Joe's Chicom buddies infecting the world with the Wuhan virus.

Money flows to WHO from dumbass countries like the US and then flows to corrupt foreign governments like China Joe's Chicom buddies or Obama's Mullah buddies.

One of the best things was Trump defunding the sonofabitches. That moron China Joe did a dumbass thing and resumed funding.

Why should the US be funding anything like that with the tremendous economic effects of the Wuhan virus and the tremendous debt we have now?

Shouldn't we take care of our own people first instead of funding all these shithead countries?

Why are all you stupid Moon Bats always against putting America's interest first?

Anybody that voted for China is a ******* idiot, aren't they?

 

[daveman]

Carry on chewing crayons kids, the adults are in charge now.

Been a while since I looked it up, but last time I did, the US was exceeding the reductions mandated by Paris...and we didn't even belong to it.

Matter of fact, we're the only Western nation meeting or beating the mandated reductions.

Y'all need to get your shit together.

We are one of the highest CO2 contributors on the planet, so I guess those emission standards aren't doing the trick. We're doing better, though, despite the right screeching and hollering about wind turbines freezing in Texas.

Climate "science" is a scam. Suckers fall for it. And that'd be okay, if they weren't insisting we cripple our economy.

Paris Climate Accord vs. Scientific Results


For example, here is an excerpt from a 2016 congressional testimony that the American public should be aware of:

“No one knows the climate impact of the proposed carbon emission reductions agreed to in Paris. The main reason for this is that there is considerable latitude for countries to do as little or as much as they desire. Examining the history of global carbon emissions, it is clear that countries, especially developing countries, will continue to seek to expand energy use through carbon combustion because of their affordability in providing considerable positive benefits to their citizens.

In any case, impact on global temperature for current and proposed reductions in greenhouse gases will be tiny at best. To demonstrate this, let us assume, for example, that the total emissions from the United States were reduced to zero, as of last May 13th, 2015 (the date of a hearing at which I testified). In other words as of that day and going forward, there would be no industry, no cars, no utilities, no people – i.e. the United States would cease to exist as of that day. Regulations, of course, will only reduce emissions a small amount, but to make the point of how minuscule the regulatory impact will be, we shall simply go way beyond reality and cause the United States to vanish. With this we shall attempt to answer the question of climate change impact due to emissions reductions.

Using the U.N. IPCC impact tool known as Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse-gas Induced Climate Change or MAGICC, graduate student Rob Junod and I reduced the projected growth in total global emissions by U.S. emission contribution starting on this date and continuing on. We also used the value of the equilibrium climate sensitivity as determined from empirical techniques of 1.8 °C. After 50 years, the impact as determined by these model calculations would be only 0.05 to 0.08 °C – an amount less than that which the global temperature fluctuates from month to month. [These calculations used emission scenarios A1B-AIM and AIF-MI with U.S. emissions comprising 14 percent to 17 percent of the 2015 global emissions. There is evidence that the climate sensitivity is less than 1.8 °C, which would further lower these projections.]

See that? If in 2015, the United States stopped emitting carbon -- a complete cessation -- and that zero emission continued for 50 years, the effect on global temperature would be only 0.05 to 0.08 °C, according to the UN's own models.

That's statistical noise.

I'm not willing to give up my lifestyle for something that won't even make a difference. If you want to, go right ahead. But I'm not interested.

 

[OldLady]

Today President Dufus announced he was going to resume funding WHO, another way to shovel money to China.

WHO isn't connected to China.

I know you Moon Bats are uneducated and low information because you get you news from CNN but it was WHO that ran cover for China Joe's Chicom buddies infecting the world with the Wuhan virus.

Money flows to WHO from dumbass countries like the US and then flows to corrupt foreign governments like China Joe's Chicom buddies or Obama's Mullah buddies.

One of the best things was Trump defunding the sonofabitches. That moron China Joe did a dumbass thing and resumed funding.

Why should the US be funding anything like that with the tremendous economic effects of the Wuhan virus and the tremendous debt we have now?

Shouldn't we take care of our own people first instead of funding all these shithead countries?

Why are all you stupid Moon Bats always against putting America's interest first?

Anybody that voted for China is a ******* idiot, aren't they?

WHO is based in Switzerland. I'm very aware of how WHO handled China's secretiveness when Covid emerged. They could have done better, but they were desperately trying to get their foot in the door.

WHO does good work, irreplaceable and necessary work. We may both be alive because of them and not even know it. Millions are.

 

[OldLady]

Carry on chewing crayons kids, the adults are in charge now.

Been a while since I looked it up, but last time I did, the US was exceeding the reductions mandated by Paris...and we didn't even belong to it.

Matter of fact, we're the only Western nation meeting or beating the mandated reductions.

Y'all need to get your shit together.

We are one of the highest CO2 contributors on the planet, so I guess those emission standards aren't doing the trick. We're doing better, though, despite the right screeching and hollering about wind turbines freezing in Texas.

Climate "science" is a scam. Suckers fall for it. And that'd be okay, if they weren't insisting we cripple our economy.

Paris Climate Accord vs. Scientific Results


For example, here is an excerpt from a 2016 congressional testimony that the American public should be aware of:

“No one knows the climate impact of the proposed carbon emission reductions agreed to in Paris. The main reason for this is that there is considerable latitude for countries to do as little or as much as they desire. Examining the history of global carbon emissions, it is clear that countries, especially developing countries, will continue to seek to expand energy use through carbon combustion because of their affordability in providing considerable positive benefits to their citizens.

In any case, impact on global temperature for current and proposed reductions in greenhouse gases will be tiny at best. To demonstrate this, let us assume, for example, that the total emissions from the United States were reduced to zero, as of last May 13th, 2015 (the date of a hearing at which I testified). In other words as of that day and going forward, there would be no industry, no cars, no utilities, no people – i.e. the United States would cease to exist as of that day. Regulations, of course, will only reduce emissions a small amount, but to make the point of how minuscule the regulatory impact will be, we shall simply go way beyond reality and cause the United States to vanish. With this we shall attempt to answer the question of climate change impact due to emissions reductions.

Using the U.N. IPCC impact tool known as Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse-gas Induced Climate Change or MAGICC, graduate student Rob Junod and I reduced the projected growth in total global emissions by U.S. emission contribution starting on this date and continuing on. We also used the value of the equilibrium climate sensitivity as determined from empirical techniques of 1.8 °C. After 50 years, the impact as determined by these model calculations would be only 0.05 to 0.08 °C – an amount less than that which the global temperature fluctuates from month to month. [These calculations used emission scenarios A1B-AIM and AIF-MI with U.S. emissions comprising 14 percent to 17 percent of the 2015 global emissions. There is evidence that the climate sensitivity is less than 1.8 °C, which would further lower these projections.]

See that? If in 2015, the United States stopped emitting carbon -- a complete cessation -- and that zero emission continued for 50 years, the effect on global temperature would be only 0.05 to 0.08 °C, according to the UN's own models.

That's statistical noise.

I'm not willing to give up my lifestyle for something that won't even make a difference. If you want to, go right ahead. But I'm not interested.

That's why the Paris Accords have 190+ countries involved. If ALL countries contribute to the reductions, we'll get somewhere.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How is this beneficial to the United States?

It's more a planetary thing. We've only got one and we all share it; what one country does affects the rest because we can't section off the atmosphere or the oceans. Setting goals and sharing some resources to clean up our act globally benefits us as an inhabitant of the planet.

The United States is one of the least polluting countries in the world. Our emissions are way down from 30 years ago. Additionally, China and India, the two biggest polluters on the planet, aren't bound by the same restrictions as the west. Environmental activists have even said the Paris Climate Accord is completely useless

Why the Paris Agreement won't save us from climate change | CNN

Despite decades of UN climate change conferences, the fight to save the Earth's climate from collapse has still barely begun, writes Mark Lynas.

www.cnn.com

 

[daveman]

Carry on chewing crayons kids, the adults are in charge now.

Been a while since I looked it up, but last time I did, the US was exceeding the reductions mandated by Paris...and we didn't even belong to it.

Matter of fact, we're the only Western nation meeting or beating the mandated reductions.

Y'all need to get your shit together.

We are one of the highest CO2 contributors on the planet, so I guess those emission standards aren't doing the trick. We're doing better, though, despite the right screeching and hollering about wind turbines freezing in Texas.

Climate "science" is a scam. Suckers fall for it. And that'd be okay, if they weren't insisting we cripple our economy.

Paris Climate Accord vs. Scientific Results


For example, here is an excerpt from a 2016 congressional testimony that the American public should be aware of:

“No one knows the climate impact of the proposed carbon emission reductions agreed to in Paris. The main reason for this is that there is considerable latitude for countries to do as little or as much as they desire. Examining the history of global carbon emissions, it is clear that countries, especially developing countries, will continue to seek to expand energy use through carbon combustion because of their affordability in providing considerable positive benefits to their citizens.

In any case, impact on global temperature for current and proposed reductions in greenhouse gases will be tiny at best. To demonstrate this, let us assume, for example, that the total emissions from the United States were reduced to zero, as of last May 13th, 2015 (the date of a hearing at which I testified). In other words as of that day and going forward, there would be no industry, no cars, no utilities, no people – i.e. the United States would cease to exist as of that day. Regulations, of course, will only reduce emissions a small amount, but to make the point of how minuscule the regulatory impact will be, we shall simply go way beyond reality and cause the United States to vanish. With this we shall attempt to answer the question of climate change impact due to emissions reductions.

Using the U.N. IPCC impact tool known as Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse-gas Induced Climate Change or MAGICC, graduate student Rob Junod and I reduced the projected growth in total global emissions by U.S. emission contribution starting on this date and continuing on. We also used the value of the equilibrium climate sensitivity as determined from empirical techniques of 1.8 °C. After 50 years, the impact as determined by these model calculations would be only 0.05 to 0.08 °C – an amount less than that which the global temperature fluctuates from month to month. [These calculations used emission scenarios A1B-AIM and AIF-MI with U.S. emissions comprising 14 percent to 17 percent of the 2015 global emissions. There is evidence that the climate sensitivity is less than 1.8 °C, which would further lower these projections.]

See that? If in 2015, the United States stopped emitting carbon -- a complete cessation -- and that zero emission continued for 50 years, the effect on global temperature would be only 0.05 to 0.08 °C, according to the UN's own models.

That's statistical noise.

I'm not willing to give up my lifestyle for something that won't even make a difference. If you want to, go right ahead. But I'm not interested.

That's why the Paris Accords have 190+ countries involved. If ALL countries contribute to the reductions, we'll get somewhere.

Nope. Did you even comprehend the article I linked?

Meanwhile, the Paris Accord did not limit the emissions from Asian countries -- China and India. They're laughing at the gullible Western fools crippling their economies while the nations with no restrictions are raking in container ships full of cash.

 

[Correll]

US officially rejoins Paris Agreement

United States Secretary of State Anthony Blinken (pictured) announced on Friday that the country officially returned to the Paris Agreement, underscoring that the Biden administration continues to imp...

www.teletrader.com

What a great end to a rather downbeat week. For those of us in the free world it is great that the US is once again taking its place in the famil of nations.

How is the UK doing with meeting it's goals?

 

[OldLady]

How is this beneficial to the United States?

It's more a planetary thing. We've only got one and we all share it; what one country does affects the rest because we can't section off the atmosphere or the oceans. Setting goals and sharing some resources to clean up our act globally benefits us as an inhabitant of the planet.

The United States is one of the least polluting countries in the world. Our emissions are way down from 30 years ago. Additionally, China and India, the two biggest polluters on the planet, aren't bound by the same restrictions as the west. Environmental activists have even said the Paris Climate Accord is completely useless

Why the Paris Agreement won't save us from climate change | CNN

Despite decades of UN climate change conferences, the fight to save the Earth's climate from collapse has still barely begun, writes Mark Lynas.

www.cnn.com

That's not exactly what they said. So we haven't met our goals yet. So we give up? We've made progress. China and India have their own unique problems and every country set different goals because of that. It will take money from wealthier countries to help a country like India which is still trying to figure out how to feed all its people and get water and electricity to its villages. That's part of what the Paris Acccords is supposed to help with.

And China is coming onboard.
In his speech to the UN General Assembly on September 22, 2020, President Xi Jinping of China announced that China will scale up its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to tackling climate change by adopting more vigorous policies and measures in an effort to peak carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and reach carbon neutrality before 2060.

The announcement is among the most significant signs of progress concerning countries' efforts to mitigate climate change since agreeing to the Paris Agreement in 2015.

4 Questions About China's New Climate Commitments

President Xi Jinping's announcement at the UN that China intends to peak carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and reach carbon neutrality before 2060 is one of the most significant signs of progress on tackling climate change since the 2015 Paris Agreement. Here are answers to four key questions...

www.wri.org

 

[francoHFW]

For those of us in the free world it is great

Morons think so.......

In the entire world only the GOP denies climate change and reality for that matter.....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

we already meet all of its emissions standards.

Um, no. Carbon neutral by 2050 is our plan.

Awesome!

How many new nuclear power plants should we build?