Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Ibon » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 11:01:25

Newfie wrote:Damning with faint praise?


Actually by pointing out the true solution, which is reducing drastically our population in tandem with alternative energy sources my point was actually to show how impossible it is for any international agreement to ever really address the truth. We will get there indirectly as consequences take us there. To what degree we do damage control will determine the outcome at this point. The Paris agreement still has value though as a symbolic foundation. Ridiculous this late in the game.

The mandate to fix CO2 emissions to sustainable levels is in the consequences of not having done so.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5560
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 14:03:04

Newf wrote:

Dohboi,

So please explain how the Paris accords bring CO2 sufficiently low to advert a major climatic change.

While at it please explains how hyping that India is building solar is actually reducing CO2.


First, I hope it is clear from my very long and copious history of postings here that I don't think that it is possible to avoid 'major climate change.' But it is also a fact that we can always make things worse, which is of course what we have been furiously doing.

And I am (in a sense, academically) interested in signs that we might be starting to not make things quite as utterly worse at quite so frantic a rate as we had. If noting else, for balance.

Again, I have mostly been among one of the one or two doomiest people on this site, at leat on the GW front. I am still deeply, deeply pesimistic
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 16005
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 14:10:53

Ibon wrote:my point was actually to show how impossible it is for any international agreement to ever really address the truth.


International agreements address the truth all the time. The CFC treaty banned CFCs. The landmine convention bans landmines. Anti-whaling treaties have drastically reduced the amount of whaling. Its not hard to do.

The dishonest and politicized sales job and the unusually weak and flaccid nature of the commitments made in Paris Accords are flaws specifically in the Paris Accords---this is not typical of all international agreements.

Ibon wrote:We will get there indirectly as consequences take us there. To what degree we do damage control will determine the outcome at this point. The Paris agreement still has value though as a symbolic foundation. Ridiculous this late in the game.


+1.

Yes, that is exactly my point. And its even worse then that, because once these treaties are set up it takes decades for people to realize they aren't working. Thanks to the lying politicians who put the Paris Accords together, we're stuck with a sham climate accord probably for another 20 years, even though it doesn't reduce CO2 emissions and scientific models show it will cause large increases in global temperatures and sea level rise.

Cheers!

"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 19914
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 14:20:29

I largely agree with Plant here, except that, just because there have been effective international agreements, that this means that they are 'easy.' Or the implication that, even if these earlier agreements were [i]relatively[i] easy, that a global agreement to faze out use of by far the most widely used sources of basic power for running modern societies...wouls be 'easy.'

But yeah, as ibon pointed out, the PA is largely symbolic at this point.

And perhaps donnie, by being generally such an utterly unlikable dick, will cause people to pay more attention to the substance of the Agreement and put pressure on politicians to be as far different from The Orange One as possible by not only implementing the goals they have made, but to far exceed them. Who knows?
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 16005
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 14:56:33

dohboi wrote:I largely agree with Plant here, except that, just because there have been effective international agreements, that this means that they are 'easy.'


Its generally "easy" enough to define the goals of a treaty, and then the negotiators spend years doing the hard work of getting countries to agree to do what is needed to move towards those goals.

For instance, an anti-whaling treaty has to work to reduce whaling. Ditto for land mines---you've got to have a treaty that addresses the problem and makes progress towards the goal of reducing the use of land mines.

But in Paris they put together an accord to address global warming that approves increases in CO2 emissions that actually make global warming worse---and then they lied about it. Its a total sham IMHO.

Cheers!
Last edited by Plantagenet on Wed 07 Jun 2017, 16:08:33, edited 1 time in total.

"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 19914
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby onlooker » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 15:05:06

Its a total sham IMHO.---Thank you Plant. I am out of words. How much longer man made CO2 is emitted is now apparently totally reliant on how much longer industrial civilization can be maintained. We will not be intentionally abandoning FF. That much is clear
“When the last tree is cut down, the last fish eaten and the last stream poisoned, you will realize that you cannot eat money.”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7083
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Cid_Yama » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 16:35:07

Its a total sham IMHO.


But it was a useful sham to provide cover for those not wanting to change the status quo.

Now the masses can't comfortably go to bed at night, believing it is being taken care of.

The new EPA director has been making a tour of the talk shows, trying to take credit for the actions of previous Administrations, while dodging all questions about this one.

This guy is the slimiest of weasels, even compared to the worst we have seen. Focusing on past Administration's actions on JUST CO2. Avoiding all talk of methane, and promoting Coal as necessary to keep the lights on if something bad were to happen, but declining to answer what that might be.

And smiling that snake oil salesman smile the whole time. There is a special place in hell for him.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it." - Patrick Henry

The level of injustice and wrong you endure is directly determined by how much you quietly submit to. Even to the point of extinction.
User avatar
Cid_Yama
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 6754
Joined: Sun 27 May 2007, 02:00:00
Location: The Post Peak Oil Historian

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Cog » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 16:43:36

In three years and five months you can vote in a new president and new EPA administrator.
User avatar
Cog
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8626
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Metro-East Illinois

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Cid_Yama » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 16:54:37

In less time than that, the biosphere will take a nosedive, and it will all be self-evident. Then maybe we'll see the pitchforks and torches come out.

Pigeon Chess will finally come with consequences for the pigeons.

When it becomes clear it is the end of their world, and these people are perceived as being responsible...

I'm sure Mussolini or Khadafi did not expect the end they received.

Besides, the way things are going, I don't expect the Republicans to hold Congress after the midterms.

Can you say IMPEACHMENT?
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it." - Patrick Henry

The level of injustice and wrong you endure is directly determined by how much you quietly submit to. Even to the point of extinction.
User avatar
Cid_Yama
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 6754
Joined: Sun 27 May 2007, 02:00:00
Location: The Post Peak Oil Historian

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 17:17:44

Ambiguous language in Paris Accords permits CO2 emissions to rise by as much as 20% over the next 12 years

ambiguous-pledges-large-uncertainty-paris

A 20% increase in CO2 emissions over just 12 years would be a pretty big increase.

Of course, the good news is that somehow magic will happen and the planet won't warm more then 2°C because of the Paris Accords.

Image
Shazam! I conjure up the magical Paris Accords! I command that no matter how much CO2 emissions rise, global temperature increases cannot be greater than 2°C!

"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 19914
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Cid_Yama » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 17:50:38

As I said, a useful sham. But it is all perception. Works well when people think you are doing something and they don't need to worry. It's quite another when the perception turns to you being responsible for the end of life as they know it.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it." - Patrick Henry

The level of injustice and wrong you endure is directly determined by how much you quietly submit to. Even to the point of extinction.
User avatar
Cid_Yama
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 6754
Joined: Sun 27 May 2007, 02:00:00
Location: The Post Peak Oil Historian

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 17:56:34

Of course it makes it worse. Every gram of CO2 and methane we put into the atmosphere makes it worse.

What is the alternative?

Do you really think that every country in the world was going to pledge to immediately halt all further burning of fossil fuels for any purpose?

Y'all need to get a tiny bit real.

I have many, many problems with the PA, but it does show that the whole world can talk about this difficult subject and come to some kind of agreement about it. That's more than we can say for the US congress.

And I do think that it is maybe just possible that Trumps yanking us out may motivate the rest of the world to get much more serious and focused about it than they would have otherwise...maybe...

As cid said, if it is a sham, it is still a potentially useful one, in a better than totally cynical sense.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 16005
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 18:29:30

dohboi wrote:Of course it makes it worse. Every gram of CO2 and methane we put into the atmosphere makes it worse.

What is the alternative?


The alternative is putting less CO2 into the air, i.e. a reduction in global CO2 emissions.

This was the original intent of the UNFCCC when it was set up more than 25 years ago.

This has been the stated intent of the UNFCCC all along. For instance, the Kyoto Accords in the late 1990s had as their goal reductions in global CO2 emissions.

The Bali proposal, agreed to in 2007, would've required mandatory, binding reductions in global CO2 emissions.

Then Obama went to Copenhagen in 2009 and got in a snit with the Chinese, and the Bali draft document wasn't signed there as planned.

Then the US radically shifted positions. Under Obama's "leadership" the US abandoned the idea of reducing global CO2 emissions and instead took the position that countries should instead focus on outlawing global temperature increases

This resulted in the 2015 Paris Accords that set a limit on global temperature increases of 2°C, but allows CO2 emissions to increase as each country chooses. As I posted above, the statements from each country at Paris suggest global CO2 emissions are likely to increase by ca. 20% over the next 12 years.

The Paris accords are stupid stupid stupid. They are classic magical thinking----scientists have shown a million times that CO2 emissions are causing global warming. To set a limit on global temperature increases without restricting CO2 emissions is worse than meaningless. Its also deceptive and dishonest.

Cheers!

"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 19914
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby onlooker » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 18:41:20

Do you really think that every country in the world was going to pledge to immediately halt all further burning of fossil fuels for any purpose? ---Ergo, Industrial civilization should end as fast as possible. That is the "treaty" that would work. Death and mayhem would ensue but maybe it gives the slightest of chances for conditions to remain within a habitable range for us humans.
“When the last tree is cut down, the last fish eaten and the last stream poisoned, you will realize that you cannot eat money.”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7083
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Ibon » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 19:11:44

Plantagenet wrote:
International agreements address the truth all the time. The CFC treaty banned CFCs. The landmine convention bans landmines. Anti-whaling treaties have drastically reduced the amount of whaling. Its not hard to do.


All of the examples you mentioned have easy alternatives. None of the examples you mentioned drives modern civilization. Easy to make international agreements concerning land mines or banning CFC's in comparison with replacing fossil fuels with scalable and affordable alternatives that permits economic growth which every single country on the planet is hell bent on maintaining.

The signatories on the Paris Agreement where not overly influenced by the Koch brothers. I do not see the agreement as a scam. There is no Americans for Prosperity misinformation campaign in Europe or other parts of the world.

I see the agreement as deeply flawed because every one of those 200 countries who signed the agreement is still putting economic growth ahead of real sacrifices required to curb consumption. We all know after discussing peak oil for 10 years that replacing fossil fuels at the scale required to maintain economic growth is not possible. This is the problem, not some overt scam.

The USA on the other hand does have a misinformation campaign and scammers in likes of the Koch brothers and groups like Americans for Prosperty.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5560
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 21:22:44

"I see the agreement as deeply flawed because every one of those 200 countries who signed the agreement is still putting economic growth ahead of real sacrifices required to curb consumption"

Yeah, that's the really big problem that almost no one, besides a Kevin Anderson here and there, is even talking about.

By the way, global CO2 emission figures have been flat for the last few years. Hard to know right now if that is a temporary halt on the way to more increases, a misreading or misrepresention, or the first necessary stage in switching from ever-increasing amounts of CO2 emissions every year to ever-decreasing levels of emissions. Again, you can't slam a car going forward suddenly into reverse. You have to slow it down, bring it to a stop, and then you can put it in reverse.

The emissions data right now suggest that this is exactly the process we are in the middle of. But only time will tell.

(And yes, I know it's all too little too late if we are talking about averting bad consequences. That ship sailed years ago. But we can always try to avoid even worse consequences.)
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 16005
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 07 Jun 2017, 23:31:29

Ibon wrote: I do not see the agreement as a scam.


The word I've been using is "sham".... not scam.

I call it a sham agreement because the Paris Accords don't actually do what Obama and the other signatories say it does. Rather then reducing CO2 and mitigating climate change , countries signing the Paris agreement have actually agreed to increase global CO2 emissions by ca. 20% over the next 12 years, thereby increasing global warming.

What kind of agreement that supposedly will help reduce global warming actually calls for INCREASING CO2 emissions and INCREASING global warming? One that is a sham agreement.

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 19914
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby onlooker » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 07:24:04

Well it is a scam too, because it tries to delude the people of the world into thinking that with this agreement genuine progress to limit CO2 would be made and thus some amelioration of climate change. To me, this Paris Accord stands to be possibly the final nail in the coffin, to a climate change momentum totally beyond the ability for humanity to control.
“When the last tree is cut down, the last fish eaten and the last stream poisoned, you will realize that you cannot eat money.”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7083
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Ibon » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 13:01:16

onlooker wrote:because it tries to delude the people of the world into thinking that with this agreement genuine progress to limit CO2 would be made and thus some amelioration of climate change.


The people of the world seem all too willing to be deluded. I do not believe in a narrative of top down manipulation of group think.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5560
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 2 (merged)

Unread postby Ibon » Thu 08 Jun 2017, 13:03:31

Plantagenet wrote:
What kind of agreement that supposedly will help reduce global warming actually calls for INCREASING CO2 emissions and INCREASING global warming?


An agreement that cannot come to terms with the underlying economic growth and prosperity paradigm that refuses to be undermined by any form of mitigation.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5560
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

PreviousNext

Return to Environment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests