Quote From Joe Biden
- Thread starter Recoil45
- Start date
- Replies 83
- Views 59K
Here is some good news:
https://www.carbonbrief.org/un-climate-talks-key-outcomes-from-the-june-2021-virtual-conference
Looks like the Paris team is restarting after the COVID-19 pause. President Joe Biden got us back in just in time ... GOOD!
Bob Wilson
https://www.carbonbrief.org/un-climate-talks-key-outcomes-from-the-june-2021-virtual-conference
International climate talks have resumed following an 18-month absence, with diplomats from around the world attempting to negotiate the final rules of the Paris Agreement via the online medium of Microsoft Teams.
The “intersessional” meeting of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) “subsidiary bodies” (SBs) normally takes place in the German city of Bonn, halfway between two conferences of the parties (COPs).
After Covid-19 ruled out last year’s events entirely, this year it was forced online as nations tried to set the groundwork for the delayed COP26 in Glasgow later this year.
The event took place from 31 May to 17 June, with delegates allowed an additional week than is usual in order to make up for lost time.
However, the online talks were kept “informal”, meaning their outcomes have no legal status, with no formal decisions being made until diplomats meet in person.
. . .
The “intersessional” meeting of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) “subsidiary bodies” (SBs) normally takes place in the German city of Bonn, halfway between two conferences of the parties (COPs).
After Covid-19 ruled out last year’s events entirely, this year it was forced online as nations tried to set the groundwork for the delayed COP26 in Glasgow later this year.
The event took place from 31 May to 17 June, with delegates allowed an additional week than is usual in order to make up for lost time.
However, the online talks were kept “informal”, meaning their outcomes have no legal status, with no formal decisions being made until diplomats meet in person.
. . .
Looks like the Paris team is restarting after the COVID-19 pause. President Joe Biden got us back in just in time ... GOOD!
Bob Wilson
SouthernDude
Active Member
A very small number of people actually think for themselves. It's pretty sad. Take the blind support for the Paris accord. It is a non-binding agreement that essentially has industrialized nations spending crap loads of money for stuff. It's stupid. There are no consequences for countries - like china - that do not meet goals. We are essentially paying for a deal where the other side isn't actually obligated to participate. How is that good for us? It's stupid. It literally puts industrialized nations at a disadvantaged position.
The Paris accord isn't necessary to start a dialogue or whatever. It would be more effective to establish a carbon tariff - at least then carbon emissions across borders are being directly charged. No "international deals" necessary because they really aren't that effective anyways. China still emits a ton of Ozone depleting CFCs https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48353341 . So much for whatever non-binding agreement was supposed to address that. Of course China lies and says "uh uh it's all illegal manufacturers". I don't believe that for a second. The same will happen with greenhouse gasses. It is beyond stupid to create some "agreement" where known dishonest parties will benefit, but that is what has happened with the Paris accord.
There fixed.
We’ve known for a long, long time right-wingers oppose ANY international climate efforts against man-made climate change. The opposition is a fraud and remains that way today.
Bob Wilson
SouthernDude
Active Member
Cool. Now explain why you are so defensive of an "agreement" that doesn't in any way shape or form allow for consequences against any rogue nations that don't attempt to reduce emissions? Very odd.
Because the Paris Accord (Agreement) is sharing facts and data, not your silly straw man. It is an international attempt to get a handle on man-made global warming that your lying propaganda sources deny.
Bob Wilson
SouthernDude
Active Member
So it's not about reducing emissions, only sharing research data? You can't be serious.
I’m not sure if you are lying so we’ll use the Proverb term, “fool” for your post.
Bob Wilson
SouthernDude
Active Member
Why did you avoid the question?
It is the only answer your knowingly bogus question deserves. The lie is yours.
Bob Wilson
SouthernDude
Active Member
lol. You actually have no argument against my point. It's nakedly obvious dude. Everyone can tell.
No problem, your anti-Paris Accord political nonsense has and continues to fail. Reminds me of the question, “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
Biden wins and announced rejoining the Paris Accord. Game, set, point … loser.
Bob Wilson
SouthernDude
Active Member
lol. what? How is it nonsense to believe that the Paris accord doesn't give any meaningful consequence for nations that don't uphold their reduction agreement? You have yet to disprove that. This is in no way some kafka trap question. Clearly you think I'm mistaken on something, yet you never explain how.
The Paris Accord like any other treaty is only as effective as those who follow the agreed actions. Since man-made, global warming is dynamic, it requires updating the facts and data. Each country brings what they can and the results are tracked. For example, President Biden and the USA:
- oil pipeline permits are dropped
- national parks are preserved from oil exploration
- COVID-19 reduced carbon dioxide generation
- ICE vehicle bans come into effect
The Paris parties do what they can to mitigate their adverse effects. So I remain amazed that the political attacks on the Paris Accord have yet to notice what Brazil has and is doing to reduce carbon capture in the Amazon. No, it is the blatant xenophobia against China that comes out time and time again.
If there was any indication the anti-Paris parties were making a serious study of man-made global warming, we would have something to discuss. But anti-China xenophobia doesn't work ... Trump lost in part because of it.
Bob Wilson
Source: https://www.reuters.com/business/en...cord-impose-curbs-us-oil-industry-2021-01-20/
This is one of many reasons why I voted for and donated to the Biden campaign.
Bob Wilson
WASHINGTON, Jan 20 (Reuters) - Incoming U.S. president Joe Biden will announce America’s return to the international Paris Agreement to fight climate change on Wednesday, the centerpiece of a raft of day-one executive orders aimed at restoring U.S. leadership in combating global warming.
The announcements will also include a sweeping order to review all of ex-President Donald Trump's actions weakening climate change protections, the revocation of a vital permit for the Keystone XL oil pipeline project from Canada, and a moratorium on oil and gas leasing activities in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge that Trump's administration had recently opened to development, Biden aides said.
The orders will mark the start of a major policy reversal in the world’s second-largest greenhouse gas emitter behind China, after four years during which Trump’s administration pilloried climate science and rolled back environmental regulation to maximize fossil fuel development.
. . .
The announcements will also include a sweeping order to review all of ex-President Donald Trump's actions weakening climate change protections, the revocation of a vital permit for the Keystone XL oil pipeline project from Canada, and a moratorium on oil and gas leasing activities in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge that Trump's administration had recently opened to development, Biden aides said.
The orders will mark the start of a major policy reversal in the world’s second-largest greenhouse gas emitter behind China, after four years during which Trump’s administration pilloried climate science and rolled back environmental regulation to maximize fossil fuel development.
. . .
This is one of many reasons why I voted for and donated to the Biden campaign.
Bob Wilson
SouthernDude
Active Member
What? The IPCC has existed for more than three decades. It is literally the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. That has been performing the data goals you outlined and essentially makes the Paris accord redundant by how you characterize it. What you describe is the smallest part of the Paris accord
There's obviously more to the Paris accord than just research - there are also announced reduction targets (NDCs) for each nation within the agreement itself. However, there are zero consequences for any nation that doesn't meet their stated targets. That is the key criticism that people have of this agreement. It doesn't actually resolve the game theory dilemma. Not to mention that the US and several other countries could foot the bill on some "climate disasters" - whatever those are - even if they have done their fair share to reduce emissions and some other nations do basically nothing. How is that a good deal? It's not and you know it.
Sure Brazil may be doing things, but would they have done that anyways without the Paris accord? There are plenty of nations that were already reducing emissions well before the accord was developed. This obviously doesn't address the concern with the lack of recourse if a nation doesn't follow their NDCs.
It's not xenophobia or whatever word you progressives have bludgeoned into meaninglessness; the concern with China is that they are by far the top emitter and they have a history of not upholding their end on these agreements (They still release enough CFCs to the point where the Ozone hole hasn't closed at the rate expected). The Chinese government also has a history of lying about crap and there have been plenty of reports that make doubting their efforts warranted. If climate change is such a massive risk to humanity, why risk it on some toothless agreement?
Are you implying that the IPCC never made a serious study of climate change? It's almost as if you don't actually know what the Paris accord even is or where aware of what the IPCC is.
SouthernDude
Active Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement
Here you go. Please read this and explain where it says this is only about 'linking research'
Where does it say only China is the problem. Facts and data are what drives such agreements that change as reality imposes itself.
Bob Wilson