[Plantagenet]

China and India climate change actions more than offset US Paris Agreement retreat[/b]

...three independent European research groups have released a new report that states emissions policies and actions at a national level, heavily influenced by China and India, have visibly reduced end of century temperature estimates. The newest projections suggest the world is headed for a warming of 3.4°C (6.1° F) by 2100, down from 3.6°C (6.5°F) predicted a year ago, as per the The Climate Action Tracker (CAT) report.

What actions exactly did China and India do to reduce global warming?

Back here in the real world they both continued to build coal-fired power plants and their CO2 production went UP this year. In fact, atmospheric CO2 levels went up to new record highs, principally because of the increasing CO2 production from China and India. Those actions make global warming WORSE, not better.

Cheers!

[dohboi]

I think the article is talking projected long term trends, while what happened this year is obviously short term. But who knows really how things will pan out in the long term (besides very, very badly)?

The increase in China's emissions seems to have been because they could not use their hydro effectively due to (likely GW-exacerbated) droughts...

So on the one hand, it is not likely something that will be repeated next year or in following years, at least not with regular consistency, not for a while at least.

On the other hand, this is the kind of human linked feedback we are likely to see more and more of going forward.

[onlooker]

Well, the poorest countries are not the biggest emitters nor do they have the clout to force action in these climate treaties. So basically, they are just going to have grin and bare it
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/eco ... -1.3260531

[Plantagenet]

I just saw the most amazing number.

It involves Saudi Arabia's commitments under the Paris Climate Accords.

Most people probably think that Saudi Arabia and other countries made pledges under the Paris Accords to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. But in reality Saudi Arabia and many other countries pledged to greatly INCREASE their CO2 emissions under the Paris Accords.

Lets look at the Saudi numbers:

Saudi committed to increase their CO2 emissions above an "dynamic" baseline (i.e. an INCREASING base number) --- independent analysis of the Saudi pledge indicates the under the Paris Accords Saudi CO2 emissions will INCREASE by as much as 110% by 2030.

climateactiontracker.org/countries/saudiarabia

Think about that. Saudi and many other countries signed a UN Treaty pledging to INCREASE their CO2 emission in the Paris Accords. Thanks to the Paris Accords the countries of the world are now committed to emit MORE CO2 and make global warming WORSE.

This means the Accords are worse then worthless---they will actually make the climate worse.

-------------------

climateactiontracker.org (link above) analyses the Paris Accord commitments of all the countries involved. Check it out.

[onlooker]

And in line with these fraud climate negotiations, the world is set to hit it's highest levels of CO2 emissions in 2017
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/1211 ... 2017-cop23

[Cog]

And in line with these fraud climate negotiations, the world is set to hit it's highest levels of CO2 emissions in 2017
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/1211 ... 2017-cop23

Perhaps you need to complain to India and China about that. You know, the countries that were exempt on CO2 emissions.

[Plantagenet]

And in line with these fraud climate negotiations, the world is set to hit it's highest levels of CO2 emissions in 2017
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/1211 ... 2017-cop23

Perhaps you need to complain to India and China about that. You know, the countries that were exempt on CO2 emissions.

Blame Obama for that. He's the main promoter of this fraudulent climate treaty that claims to limit global warming but actually ratifies some countries greatly increasing their CO2 emissions, resulting in net increases in global CO2 emissions.


Obama bears primary responsibility for the fraudulent Paris climate accords

[onlooker]

How about the whole frigging world. Afterall, weren't most countries signers to the Paris accord?

[Plantagenet]

Absolutely right. TPTB in countries around the world jumped at this opportunity to "greenwash" their ever increasing CO2 emissions. But Obama is the main culprit.

Obama and his administration derailed the Copenhagen climate treaty in 2009, which would've required mandatory CO2 emissions cuts.

Obama and the US then proposed a different kind of UN climate treaty, and worked to get it drafted up between 2010-2015

Then Obama locked in the basis for the Paris Accords when he negotiated a bilateral US-China "climate deal" that allowed China to increase their CO2 emissions with no limits. India said they wanted the same deal. Obama agreed.

Then in Paris Obama was the main promoter of this farce, encouraging countries all over the world to jump on board. They treaty didn't do anything, so just about every country signed up, and they all promised the Paris Accords would limit global warming. Corporations also signed up as supporters, including a number of large oil companies. I think McDonalds is a corporate sponsor. And virtually all of the mainstream media promoted the treaty....and in most cases continues to do so.

Basically the treaty is "greenwashing". The ruling class can now pretend they are doing something about climate change when they are actually making it worse.


The Paris Accords are just "greenwashing" on a global scale.

Cheers!

[onlooker]

It's all one BIG LIE
https://lokisrevengeblog.wordpress.com/ ... cking-lie/

[dohboi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9eGNfLwigU

[dohboi]

An oldie but goodie:

http://kevinanderson.info/blog/the-hidd ... agreement/

The hidden agenda: how veiled techno-utopias shore up the Paris Agreement

...The deepest challenge to whether the Agreement succeeds or fails, will not come from the incessant sniping of sceptics and luke-warmers or those politicians favouring a literal reading of Genesis over Darwin. Instead, it was set in train many years ago by a cadre of well-meaning scientists, engineers and economists investigating a Plan B. What if the international community fails to recognise that temperatures relate to ongoing cumulative emissions of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide? What if world leaders remain doggedly committed to a scientifically illiterate focus on 2050 (“not in my term of office”)? By then, any ‘carbon budget’ for even an outside chance of 2°C will have been squandered – and our global experiment will be hurtling towards 4°C or more. Hence the need to develop a Plan B.

Well the answer was simple. If we choose to continue our love affair with oil, coal and gas, loading the atmosphere with evermore carbon dioxide, then at some later date when sense prevails, we’ll be forced to attempt sucking our carbon back out of the atmosphere. Whilst a plethora of exotic Dr Strangelove options vie for supremacy to deliver on such a grand project, those with the ear of governments have plumped for BECCS (biomass energy carbon capture and storage) as the most promising “negative emission technology”. However these government advisors (Integrated Assessment Modellers – clever folk developing ‘cost-optimised’ solutions to 2°C by combining physics with economic and behavioural modelling) no longer see negative emission technologies as a last ditch Plan B – but rather now promote it as central pivot of the one and only Plan...

[onlooker]

Empty promises: G20 subsidies to oil, gas and coal production

http://priceofoil.org/2015/11/11/empty- ... roduction/

[Plantagenet]

Empty promises: G20 subsidies to oil, gas and coal production

http://priceofoil.org/2015/11/11/empty- ... roduction/

The Paris Accords actually call for INCREASING CO2 emissions. The subsidies for FF production are totally consistent with and allowed under the Paris Accords.

What is patently untrue is Obama’s claim that the Paris Accords will limit global warming to 2 degrees C. That’s impossible as long as CO2 emissions keep going up

Cheers!

[dohboi]

You keep repeating these points. But I have to ask, do you really think there was ever any chance that any agreement coming out of Paris would have resulted in immediate decreases in total global emissions of CO2?

Oh, and I'm shocked, shocked to hear you of all people ever claiming anything negative about our dear former leader, the big O.

(Curious also to know whether you think the other <<O>> is likely to be our next pOtus? )

[Plantagenet]

You keep repeating these points. But I have to ask, do you really think there was ever any chance that any agreement coming out of Paris would have resulted in immediate decreases in total global emissions of CO2?

Of course not. The Obama administration had long ago abandoned the position of wanting CO2 emission reductions in the UN climate treaty.

Remember back at the 2010 Copenhagen meeting when the leaders of the world assembled to sign and ratify a binding UN treaty that mandated CO2 emission reductions, and contained penalties for countries that failed to meet their commitments? The deal didn't get signed because Obama got in a tiff with the Chinese. After Obama derailed the Copenhagen meeting, resulting in that agreement not being ratified, the Obama administration abandoned the already negotiated treaty that would've been signed at Copenhagen. Obama et alia changed the longheld US negotiating position on UN climate treaties so that instead of supporting CO2 reductions, the Obama administration started pushing for limits on global temperature increases. Over the next 6 years a new treaty was negotiated that contained no limits on CO2 emissions but instead set limits on global T increases. That was the only treaty on the table at Paris---there was never a chance of a treaty to reduce CO2 emissions at Paris primarily because Obama set it up that way.

I'm shocked, shocked to hear you of all people ever claiming anything negative about our dear former leader, the big O.

The man single-handedly screwed the entire planet. Its his fault that the UN climate treaty process abandoned the goal of CO2 reductions.

Curious also to know whether you think the other <<O>> is likely to be our next pOtus?

Do you mean Michelle? She's pretty much dropped out of politics to focus on staying in super pricy posh resorts, hasn't she?



Here's a question for you, Doh. You are knowledgeable and concerned about global warming issues. Why aren't you outraged that the main Paris Climate Accords don't even mention CO2 and CH4 emissions, much less mandate CO2 and CH4 emission reductions? Are you OK with the Obama administration changing the US negotiating position to place the focus on setting limits on T increases rather then on CO2 and CH4 emission reductions? How can we ever hope to limit T increases without limiting CO2 and CH4 emissions?

Cheers!

[KaiserJeep]

Nobody here even has a right to be indignant about TPTB unless they have:
1) Traded up from an ICE vehicle to an EV. (I don't mean a hybrid wich is just a slightly more efficient ICE vehicle.)
or
1A) Dumped the last personal vehicle for a motorcycle, bicycle, sailboat, or otherwise reduced personal fuel purchases to <100g/yr.
2) Added a renewable electrical energy source (PV, wind turbine, hydro, etc.) to their residence. Reduced HVAC by any means to 1/2 or less of the average per capita figure for the US.
3) Altered diet to reduce meats, and increase locally sourced vegetables and fruits.

I could go on, but you get the idea. TPTB do not control your personal impacts on climate, you do. You should make the changes to your lifestyle in any case.

[dohboi]

No, sorry, I meant Oprah! But it's really to all too bizarre to even discuss.

And are you not equally angry at Bush?

KJ, and stopped flying, right?

[KaiserJeep]

Well...no. I still have to fly to visit my grandkids and my other place on Nantucket. Maybe next year I'll add that one, after selling the house in Silicon Valley.

I didn't ask anybody to do anything I haven't done already.

[dohboi]

Yup, with our generally far flung families, most of us are 'killing the planet with love'...yet another deadly pattern most of us seem to be locked into.