Quote From Joe Biden

  • Thread starter Thread starter Recoil45
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 83
  • Views Views 59K
Domenick said:
I believe the argument is, that if we don't make huge changes, it's going to impact us a lot harder than what we spend to fix things now. So, every dollar invested in saving our climate will pay dividends. Some argue that those dividends will actually start being repaid sooner than later as well.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. And we followed this for the last 30 or so years. We spent billions doing it. The issue is, our enemies such as China have not, in fact they used our environmental consciousness against us and continue to do so while we embrace them. Please read the link I posted about their expansion of coal plants over the next many years. The Paris accord actually allows them to do this without penalty, all while we continue to spend billions for that last small percentage of pollution reduction.

This crap is all backwards. Tariff the hell out of products from high polluting countries like China until they match our greeness. Tax the hell out of outsourced labor to countries like India until they match our greeness. Joining the Paris accord achieves nothing and puts us at an economic disadvantage. Even Biden acknowledges the US cannot meaningfully impact climate change (the point of this thread) which is a first for the democrat party and is 100% true.


Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
Last edited:
Recoil45 said:
Tariff the hell out of products from high polluting countries like China until they match our greeness. Tax the hell out of outsourced labor to countries like India until they match our greeness. Joining the Paris accord achieves nothing and puts us at an economic disadvantage.
Click to expand...
The Paris Accord creates a forum so it isn't just the USA but other countries can join in. As for 'tariffs', they are just a Federal sales tax picked up by USA buyers, the small customers like you and me. That is why the Republicans like tariffs that tax the consumer.

Bob Wilson
 
bwilson4web said:
The Paris Accord creates a forum so it isn't just the USA but other countries can join in. As for 'tariffs', they are just a Federal sales tax picked up by USA buyers, the small customers like you and me. That is why the Republicans like tariffs that tax the consumer.

Bob Wilson
Click to expand...

You keep repeating that talking point but don't explain any further.

Below is a quote from the previous link. Keep in mind China is part of the Paris Accord.

What are your thoughts on this?

How does the Paris accord hold China responsible for this?

Quote:
Coal remains at the heart of China’s flourishing economy. In 2019, 58 percent of the country’s total energy consumption came from coal, which helps explain why China accounts for 28 percent of all global CO2 emissions. And China continues to build coal-fired power plants at a rate that outpaces the rest of the world combined. In 2020, China brought 38.4 gigawatts of new coal-fired power into operation, more than three times what was brought on line everywhere else.

A key risk to China maintaining a `moderately prosperous society’ remains a lack of energy to drive its economy.
A total of 247 gigawatts of coal power is now in planning or development, nearly six times Germany’s entire coal-fired capacity. China has also proposed additional new coal plants that, if built, would generate 73.5 gigawatts of power, more than five times the 13.9 gigawatts proposed in the rest of the world combined. Last year, Chinese provinces granted construction approval to 47 gigawatts of coal power projects, more than three times the capacity permitted in 2019.


Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
Recoil45 said:
You keep repeating that talking point but don't explain any further. ...
Click to expand...
Source: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement

Implementation of the Paris Agreement requires economic and social transformation, based on the best available science. The Paris Agreement works on a 5- year cycle of increasingly ambitious climate action carried out by countries. By 2020, countries submit their plans for climate action known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs).​

This is not a unilateral, 'USA going to force', function treaty. Rather it is a collaboration of countries which like the UN, means talking to achieve a common understanding and goal. In turn, this means negotiations and adapting to new knowledge. For example, you seem bent on yell-posting about China. Perhaps you missed this May 2021 article:
https://www.scmp.com/economy/articl...-coal-shipments-continue-remain-stuck-chinese

Australian miners have continued shipping small amounts of coal to China since the start of the year despite an unofficial ban on their coal imports, and those shipments have not been cleared by Chinese customs to enter the country.

Some analysts said miners were hoping that China would at least lift the ban for thermal coal ahead of the peak summer electricity-generation period, but there has been no indication that this may happen. Moreover, given the continued deterioration of communication channels between Beijing and Canberra, the prospects of any thawing in relations appear remote.

Amid worsening bilateral ties, China unofficially banned Australian coal in October, leaving dozens of vessels waiting off its coast. Over the ensuing months, some docked to release crew members, though cargoes were never cleared, and some were redirected to other markets.

But in February, sales data provided by analysts showed that 180,000 tonnes of coking coal departed from the port of Hay Point in Queensland, one of Australia’s key coal terminals, bound for China. Australian customs recorded that a similar-sized shipment was dispatched, but the port source was not identified, according to Wood Mackenzie Vesseltracker, which provides maritime data.
. . .​

Regardless of cause, it has the effect of leaving Australian mined coal unburned in ships. Perhaps the effect you wanted to see?

It is common for right-wingers to be brittle and inflexible when new knowledge comes around. They tend to insist on one truth while ignoring that 'the world changes.' It is why their claims are seen as little more than the propaganda of their self-selected, sources, ... and not trustable.

Bob Wilson
 
bwilson4web said:
Source: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement

Implementation of the Paris Agreement requires economic and social transformation, based on the best available science. The Paris Agreement works on a 5- year cycle of increasingly ambitious climate action carried out by countries. By 2020, countries submit their plans for climate action known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs).​

This is not a unilateral, 'USA going to force', function treaty. Rather it is a collaboration of countries which like the UN, means talking to achieve a common understanding and goal. In turn, this means negotiations and adapting to new knowledge. For example, you seem bent on yell-posting about China. Perhaps you missed this May 2021 article:
https://www.scmp.com/economy/articl...-coal-shipments-continue-remain-stuck-chinese

Australian miners have continued shipping small amounts of coal to China since the start of the year despite an unofficial ban on their coal imports, and those shipments have not been cleared by Chinese customs to enter the country.

Some analysts said miners were hoping that China would at least lift the ban for thermal coal ahead of the peak summer electricity-generation period, but there has been no indication that this may happen. Moreover, given the continued deterioration of communication channels between Beijing and Canberra, the prospects of any thawing in relations appear remote.

Amid worsening bilateral ties, China unofficially banned Australian coal in October, leaving dozens of vessels waiting off its coast. Over the ensuing months, some docked to release crew members, though cargoes were never cleared, and some were redirected to other markets.

But in February, sales data provided by analysts showed that 180,000 tonnes of coking coal departed from the port of Hay Point in Queensland, one of Australia’s key coal terminals, bound for China. Australian customs recorded that a similar-sized shipment was dispatched, but the port source was not identified, according to Wood Mackenzie Vesseltracker, which provides maritime data.
. . .​

Regardless of cause, it has the effect of leaving Australian mined coal unburned in ships. Perhaps the effect you wanted to see?

It is common for right-wingers to be brittle and inflexible when new knowledge comes around. They tend to insist on one truth while ignoring that 'the world changes.' It is why their claims are seen as little more than the propaganda of their self-selected, sources, ... and not trustable.

Bob Wilson
Click to expand...

Your post is not a rebuttal to mine. Your post also has nothing to with being green or the Paris accord. It's a political dispute between China and Australia. Your move to label me as a right-winger because you don't have a rebuttal was expected. If you really want to be green, think for yourself and hold your politicians accountable.

China is massively expanding coal power generation under the Paris accord with no repercussions and half the country cheers we rejoined it.


Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
Last edited:
Recoil45 said:
Your post is not a rebuttal to mine. Your post also has nothing to with being green or the Paris accord. It's a political dispute between China and Australia. Your move to label me as a right-winger because you don't have a rebuttal was expected. If you really want to be green, think for yourself and hold your politicians accountable.

China is massively expanding coal power generation under the Paris accord with no repercussions and half the country cheers we rejoined it.
Click to expand...
Your intellectual failings are not my problem.

Bob Wilson
 
Source: NASA: Earth is trapping 'unprecedented' amount of heat, warming 'faster than expected'

Since 2005, the amount of heat trapped by the Earth has roughly doubled, according to a new study by NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration researchers.

This is contributing to warming oceans, air, and land, the scientists write in the study, published this week in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. "The magnitude of the increase is unprecedented," NASA scientist and lead author of the study Norman Loeb told The Washington Post. "The Earth is warming faster than expected."

Using satellite data, the researchers measured the planet's energy imbalance, which is the difference between how much energy the planet absorbs from the sun and how much is radiated back into space. If there is a positive imbalance, the Earth is absorbing more heat than it is losing; in 2005, there was a positive imbalance of about half a watt per square meter of energy from the sun, and in 2019, the positive imbalance was one watt per square meter, the Post reports.

. . .​

Expected, this is bad.

Bob Wilson
 
bwilson4web said:
Source: NASA: Earth is trapping 'unprecedented' amount of heat, warming 'faster than expected'

Since 2005, the amount of heat trapped by the Earth has roughly doubled, according to a new study by NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration researchers.

This is contributing to warming oceans, air, and land, the scientists write in the study, published this week in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. "The magnitude of the increase is unprecedented," NASA scientist and lead author of the study Norman Loeb told The Washington Post. "The Earth is warming faster than expected."

Using satellite data, the researchers measured the planet's energy imbalance, which is the difference between how much energy the planet absorbs from the sun and how much is radiated back into space. If there is a positive imbalance, the Earth is absorbing more heat than it is losing; in 2005, there was a positive imbalance of about half a watt per square meter of energy from the sun, and in 2019, the positive imbalance was one watt per square meter, the Post reports.

. . .​

Expected, this is bad.

Bob Wilson
Click to expand...

Bob,
Your post has nothing to do with the conversation. People who believe in climate change should demand action that has major financial penalties for countries who do not rise to our (USA) level of greeness. The Paris accord does nothing like this. Your current political party has great feel good taking points, but they don't back it up with any actions that will cause any meaningful improvements. Call them out on this if you really want change.

Assume for the moment that I believe that we can improve our climate in 10 years. I have not posted to the contrary here.


Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
  • Like
Reactions: R P
Full disclosure, I drive an EV because it is cheaper to operate than any ordinary car and a blast to drive.

When dealing with man-made, climate change deniers, I gained insights at:
https://skepticalscience.com//
  • Summaries of recent papers on man-made climate change
  • Summaries of political nonsense by politicians who should know better
  • Dealing with the logical fallacies of man-made climate deniers
For example:
https://skepticalscience.com//china-2060-consistent-with-15C.html

New research has found that China’s pledge to achieve “carbon neutrality” before 2060 is “largely consistent” with the Paris Agreement’s aim of limiting global warming to 1.5C.

But, to stay below this level of warming, the country will need to aim higher than its current net-zero goal and accomplish “deep” emission reductions in the near term, the authors state.

According to the study, to hit the 1.5C goal, the world’s largest emitter would need to cut its total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and energy consumption by more than 90% and 39%, respectively, by 2050 – compared to a “no-policy” scenario where the government has not and will not impose climate policies.
The paper, published in Science, also finds that the 1.5C mark would require China’s fossil fuel consumption to be “dramatically reduced” and demand for coal to drop to nearly zero by 2050.

Dr Hongbo Duan, the lead author, says the study “fills a gap” because no previous research had focused on assessing the efforts required by China to contribute to the 1.5C ambition of Paris.​

Here is an article tying Chinese carbon emissions to the 1.5C goal of the Paris Accord. In effect, looking at the details of their public policy. In contrast, you're mind is made up about the Paris Accord and further inquiries not needed. This is called making a 'straw man' assertions so you can vent your spleen about your fiction.

I have no stock in the Paris Accord (or Paris Agreement.) Rather trustable people who work from facts and data do and I'm OK with their actions. As for Paris 'skeptics,' well there is a reason why the web site is called "Skeptical Science." It applies the scientific method to folks who advocate your strange thinking but there is a difference.

The ignorance of others does not require me to correct their thinking. I'll cite a source and move on to what I find interesting.

Bob Wilson
 
Bob, you don't make any sense. If you really believe in Climate Change (and don't we all?) why wouldn't you support policies that actually support cleaner air and reduced greenhouse gas emissions? That's what Recoil45 is advocating. Why are you attacking him when he appears to be on your side if you really do want a cleaner planet? OR, maybe you really don't care, and just blindly support hypocritical politicians no matter what they say or do. Virtual signalling is not the same as real action and positive results.
 
Your inability to understand is your problem. As Ron White once said, ‘You can’t fix stupid.’

Parroting right-wing propaganda does not cure the flaws. But I’m patient and persistent.

He came with a right-wing chip on his shoulder (see title.) I’m content to knock the coward and his sympathizers down.

Bob Wilson
 
Last edited:
All you can do is personal attacks instead of addressing content or answer questions. Why do you even respond if you can't stick to the topic and discussion at hand? I am surprised that our moderator hasn't given you a time-out with all your political references and constant denigrating of anyone that might disagree with you (even when they're not).
 
There is an effective ‘Ignore User’ option that will block my posts from being seen. But I am tired of right-wing bullies trying to hijack technical forums for their political propaganda.

GROW A PAIR or GET IVER IT!

Keep trying gutless clowns.

Bob Wilson
 
Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/geb.13327?af=R

With climate change challenging marine biodiversity and resource management, it is crucial to anticipate future latitudinal and depth shifts under contrasting global change scenarios to support policy-relevant biodiversity impact assessments [e.g., Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)]. We aim to demonstrate the benefits of complying with the Paris Agreement (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) and limiting environmental changes, by assessing future distributional shifts of 10 commercially important demersal fish species.​

What do you know, we are seeing continued research from Paris. Must be frustrating to see such a hated organization continue to exist and produce research facts and data.

Bob Wilson
 
Another source: https://skepticalscience.com/new_research_2021_21.html

Posted on 26 May 2021 by doug_bostrom
...
In Permafrost carbon feedbacks threaten global climate goals, Susan Natali & crew point out a potential serious omission in Paris Accords climate targets: the changing "nature" of permafrost and the carbon and hence readily available CO2 therein. The abstract:

Rapid Arctic warming has intensified northern wildfires and is thawing carbon-rich permafrost. Carbon emissions from permafrost thaw and Arctic wildfires, which are not fully accounted for in global emissions budgets, will greatly reduce the amount of greenhouse gases that humans can emit to remain below 1.5 °C or 2 °C. The Paris Agreement provides ongoing opportunities to increase ambition to reduce society’s greenhouse gas emissions, which will also reduce emissions from thawing permafrost. In December 2020, more than 70 countries announced more ambitious nationally determined contributions as part of their Paris Agreement commitments; however, the carbon budgets that informed these commitments were incomplete, as they do not fully account for Arctic feedbacks. There is an urgent need to incorporate the latest science on carbon emissions from permafrost thaw and northern wildfires into international consideration of how much more aggressively societal emissions must be reduced to address the global climate crisis.​

We've a lot to keep track of, much of it shifting beneath our feet. Natali et al is open access and free to read. ​

What a concept, an agreed upon carbon budget, the Paris Agreement, continues to spawn carbon budget problems. This is as it should be and not used by anti-Chinese, xenophobes to lie and mislead.

Bob Wilson
 
The political aspects of this thread.

Source: https://skepticalscience.com/parties-climate-programs-miles-apart.html

President Biden on Earth Day, April 22, unveiled America’s aggressive new climate target: a 50-52% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 levels by 2030, on the way to the pledge of net zero emissions by 2050.

That ambitious target would deliver America’s contribution toward meeting the Paris Climate Agreement and the goal of limiting global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial temperatures. President Biden and supportive House Democrats are backing the pledge with a concrete legislative plan to rapidly curb greenhouse gas emissions. That said, important details of the administration’s legislative package remain largely unanswered, and it’s certain to face rough going when, in whatever eventual form, it gets to consideration in the narrowly divided Senate.

In an effort to show that they too care about climate change, House Republicans unveiled their “Energy Innovation Agenda” in the days preceding Biden’s Earth Day announcement. That agenda did not include any specific emissions targets. Rather, it includes a continued reliance on fossil fuels and explicitly opposes putting a price on carbon pollution. It stands in stark contrast to the Democrats’ ambitious plan to meet the Paris climate targets by transitioning to clean energy and leaving fossil fuels in the ground.​

Here we go, the root cause of right-wing propaganda about President Biden and the Paris Agreement.

Bob Wilson
 
Are you going senile or what?? Why don't you read our posts and respond to what we are saying? The argument is not about whether climate change is real or not. But what policies are in place, or should be, to do something about it. Talk is cheap, but haven't seen a lot of positive action, yet.

And with China being the biggest polluter and building even more coal plants, shouldn't something be done about that?

If you have nothing meaningful to say, stay out of the discussion. Personal attacks are not welcome.

R P said:
Bob, you don't make any sense. If you really believe in Climate Change (and don't we all?) why wouldn't you support policies that actually support cleaner air and reduced greenhouse gas emissions? That's what Recoil45 is advocating. Why are you attacking him when he appears to be on your side if you really do want a cleaner planet? OR, maybe you really don't care, and just blindly support hypocritical politicians no matter what they say or do. Virtual signalling is not the same as real action and positive results.
Click to expand...
Recoil45 said:
Your post is not a rebuttal to mine. Your post also has nothing to with being green or the Paris accord. It's a political dispute between China and Australia. Your move to label me as a right-winger because you don't have a rebuttal was expected. If you really want to be green, think for yourself and hold your politicians accountable.

China is massively expanding coal power generation under the Paris accord with no repercussions and half the country cheers we rejoined it.
Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
Click to expand...
 
Like I said climate change is not in question. But what are we doing about it? Personally, I don't think building new coal plants are a good idea.
 
Transparent political propaganda by right-wing posters remains such a silly parody of FOX claims. Totally false posts by low IQ idiots. Have you numb-nuts figured out that personal attacks reveal how desperate and useless you are.

The Paris Accord has more weight and utility than your posting tantrums.

Bob Wilson

ps. Former USA Marine, you aren’t even close you silly pity people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top