USA withdrawn from the Paris Accord?
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 1 of 22 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 422
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,449
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1754
    Likes (Received)
    1884

    Default USA withdrawn from the Paris Accord?

    Any thoughts on what it will do to American trade overseas, and jobs here? This is not a climate, but a foreign policy and trade issue.

    dee
    ;-D

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5695

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsipo View Post
    Any thoughts on what it will do to American trade overseas, and jobs here? This is not a climate, but a foreign policy and trade issue.

    dee
    ;-D
    Short term...nothing.
    Long term, it's just turnip ceding US leadership.
    Same with the TPP.
    America first seems to be America all alone.

  3. Likes Bobw, art.h, cyanidekid, adama liked this post
  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,956
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3358
    Likes (Received)
    3566

    Default

    Does the Accord work or does it just move the jobs to China where they make more smoke.

    I remember the the smoke stacks in Detroit..My buddy Bob remembers the River Thames black like coffee with no fish.

    I know it makes people feel good to throw money at a problem..

    Yes I am for clean air and less pollution..

    China Says It's Going to Use More Coal, With Capacity Set to Grow 19% - Bloomberg

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1354
    Likes (Received)
    2721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    Does the Accord work or does it just move the jobs to China where they make more smoke.

    I remember the the smoke stacks in Detroit..My buddy Bob remembers the River Thames black like coffee with no fish.

    I know it makes people feel good to throw money at a problem..

    Yes I am for clean air and less pollution..

    China Says It's Going to Use More Coal, With Capacity Set to Grow 19% - Bloomberg
    China is about to (if not already) exceed the USA in green energy production.
    Forbes Welcome

    Which bodes poorly for the USA:
    Who will lead the global climate landscape?

    China, India, the European Union, Canada and others have strong incentives to embrace cleaner technologies, with or without the U.S. Yes there’s the health of the planet, but there’s also economic self-interest to take into account. According to a U.S. Department of Energy report, clean energy costs are tumbling. The cost of land-based wind power, utility and distributed photovoltaic (PV) solar power, light emitting diodes (LEDs), and electric vehicles (EVs) has fallen by 41% to as high as 94% since 2008.

    China’s huge new investment into clean energy is further proof that it has no plans to change course on climate. In fact, the Chinese leadership is emboldened by the news coming out of America. Senior Chinese climate change official, Zou Ji, underscored that if Trump abdicates U.S. leadership on the Paris Agreement, “China’s influence and voice are likely to increase […] which will then spill over into other areas of global governance and increase China’s global standing, power and leadership.”
    The new administration’s actions could lead China and the EU to respond with climate-focused trade measures, such as imposing a carbon price on imports of high-carbon products, i.e., a carbon tariff border adjustment, from the U.S. and others. Former French President, Nicolas Sarkozy suggested a European carbon tax on American-made goods if President-elect Donald Trump pulls out of the climate accord.

  6. Likes art.h liked this post
  7. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,956
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3358
    Likes (Received)
    3566

    Default

    Agree along with increasing coal usage.. smoke and mirrors..

    But real time fact.. Berkeley Earth

  8. Likes Meggab, Richard King liked this post
  9. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    marysville ohio
    Posts
    9,261
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2643
    Likes (Received)
    6121

    Default

    What's the difference, everyone that signs the agreement cheats on it except us. So we get screwed again. Gordon must be sleeping or he would have already been posting about how stupid we are.

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,956
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3358
    Likes (Received)
    3566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moonlight machine View Post
    What's the difference, everyone that signs the agreement cheats on it except us. So we get screwed again. Gordon must be sleeping or he would have already been posting about how stupid we are.
    Your right look at Denmark..I better scrub that map before Gordon sees it..

    Buddy Bob says London was so bad you could not see across the street. I remember Gary Indiana when they ran SS and the smoke was so thick like red fog..

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1354
    Likes (Received)
    2721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    I remember Gary Indiana when they ran SS and the smoke was so thick like red fog..
    Hey, that's when Gary, Indiana was Great Again!

  12. Likes TheOldCar, JoeE. liked this post
  13. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Norfolk England
    Posts
    2,104
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2491
    Likes (Received)
    1550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post

    Buddy Bob says London was so bad you could not see across the street. I remember Gary Indiana when they ran SS and the smoke was so thick like red fog..
    I know nothing about that in recent years. Yes when I was young(not to be discussed)it could be what was called a pea souped,but not recently that has been reported.

  14. Likes pressbrake1 liked this post
  15. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5695

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    Because of the inequality in the manner of who would have to control "carbon" and who would not, the practical effects of the agreement would amount to income redistribution from western countries to "developing" ones.

    The amount of "green" energy being adopted by China is meaningless. They have made it abundantly clear that for the foreseeable future coal will be the dominant part of their energy policy.

    If this was really about saving the planet there would be NO exemptions and jet travel would be taxed to the point of costing several times what it does now.
    Ever notice the layer of NOx at flight altitude?

  16. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,956
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3358
    Likes (Received)
    3566

    Default

    Wall to wall wind mills would not provide the needed heat in northern states.. so that problem exists no matter how much money we throw at wind....Not saying wind is a bad thing but we need to face the facts..People are being led to hate fossil fuel, but still like heat...

    Developing countries and redistribution of wealth will never bring China to USA levels..and the amount of income is not the real wealth… it is food, comfort, safety and things like that… but many are led to only think only in dollars..More smoke and mirrors. Throw money there till USA is busted and China will still be China.

  17. Likes t.jones, Richard King liked this post
  18. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5695

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    Because of the inequality in the manner of who would have to control "carbon" and who would not, the practical effects of the agreement would amount to income redistribution from western countries to "developing" ones.

    The amount of "green" energy being adopted by China is meaningless. They have made it abundantly clear that for the foreseeable future coal will be the dominant part of their energy policy.

    If this was really about saving the planet there would be NO exemptions and jet travel would be taxed to the point of costing several times what it does now.
    Also...you are wrong.
    Everything You Think You Know About Coal in China Is Wrong - Center for American Progress

  19. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1354
    Likes (Received)
    2721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    Wall to wall wind mills would not provide the needed heat.. so that problem exists no matter how much money we throw at wind....Not saying wind is a bad thing but we need to face the facts..
    Neither wind, nor solar, nor geothermal, nor tidal are a sole-solution.

    Their strengths are geographically relative and not to be used where they aren't ideal. But if you use them wisely, you have a lot of tools in the toolbox.

    Of course... I'm also a fan of nuclear, but that seems to be hated by BOTH SIDES of the political spectrum. Fossil fuel lovers hate it because it's a threat, and green energy lovers hate it because they're too busy thinking Fukushima caused their cats to be gluten intolerant or something. So I've mostly lost hope that we would soon employ MODERN nuclear energy production.

  20. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,449
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1754
    Likes (Received)
    1884

    Default

    Do not try to re negotiate the accord, that is not the point of the post. The whole question is the consequences (both +-) of pulling out, both political and economic. Obviously there will be a shakeup, it will either strengthen the resolve of the remaining signers or will dissolve the agreement, both will have economic impact on US trade. If the remaining nations elect to put a carbon tax on the US, the US will loose all leverage against it, retaliatory actions may make US trade suffer, etc. If the pact falls apart then it becomes all bilateral, which is a very mixed bag at best. The reason i am asking because i have very mixed feelings about uprooting the accord.

    So? Wadaya think?

    dee
    ;-D

  21. Likes JNieman liked this post
  22. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1354
    Likes (Received)
    2721

    Default

    I will not be surprised if Europe starts up the carbon sanctions, making American products less competitive there.

    I also fear China looking better in other countries. Contrary to Scottl, I do believe their investment in green energy will go far, politically, and thus economically. I'm one of the first ones to cuss, curse, and spit at China but I have respect for their investment in non-fossil-fuel energy production.


    Look at the big driver of our onshoring... automation is helping us reshore jobs and keep jobs from offshoring. We're (USA manufacturing) barely holding that line while China is reviled and "Made in USA" is being revitalized. We just started tipping things toward the better in the last few years (plenty of numbers on that at WSJ and Forbes) we can't afford to kill that momentum nor add more weight to China's side of the scales.

    I'm not a big fan of international treaties like this, in general, but I don't see the harm, I do see the benefits (continued international trade profitability) and so I see little to no reason to grandstand over this. I don't see any 'redistribution of wealth' because any sanctions are domestic and not sent overseas. It's a promise that a country will impose fines/taxes to their own companies that show no curbing of pollution or increases. That money doesn't get sent overseas, that money is just tax, to be used however their gov't deems it. We don't pay tribute to some foreign entity. We just choose to promote cleaner companies and encourage change in nastier ones. The agreement is just the nations saying "Yes, we'll make domestic policy changes and show improvement for the benefit of the globe"

  23. Likes Milland liked this post
  24. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    northeastern Pa, USA
    Posts
    596
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    106
    Likes (Received)
    166

    Default

    Read the agreements financial section. Its budget call for 200 billion USDs by the year 2020. Who do you think is going to pay most of that bill? Look how the NATO nations pay!!!!!

    Norquist: Tax Reform Could Bring 4% Growth Rate | Americans for Tax Reform

  25. Likes steve-l, mike 44, t.jones, lonestar1224 liked this post
  26. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    moscow,ohio
    Posts
    5,904
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    579
    Likes (Received)
    1887

    Default

    of course China will use more coal...and we will sell it to them..They will use it to develop better technologies....

    and in the end they will kick our ass and we will become the third world country.., our resources squandered and sold to the highest bidder.

  27. Likes pressbrake1, adama, JoeE., Rudd, EndlessWaltz liked this post
  28. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5695

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy1010 View Post
    Read the agreements financial section. Its budget call for 200 billion USDs by the year 2020. Who do you think is going to pay most of that bill? Look how the NATO nations pay!!!!!

    Norquist: Tax Reform Could Bring 4% Growth Rate | Americans for Tax Reform
    Norquist is a lying sack of shit...or else delusional.

  29. Likes Milland, Rudd liked this post
  30. #19
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Country
    DENMARK
    Posts
    3,154
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4007
    Likes (Received)
    12665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moonlight machine View Post
    What's the difference, everyone that signs the agreement cheats on it except us. So we get screwed again. Gordon must be sleeping or he would have already been posting about how stupid we are.
    What made our news tonight is that if Trump starts nullifying previous agreements the USA will be regarded as no longer trustworthy. That seems to be the consensus of most countries. IOW why bother making agreements, trade, climate or whatever, if any new president just decides that's OK to cancel. Wonder what congress will do?

    I doubt if it'll affect me personally but I think that'll make it much harder for the USA to reach agreements with other countries. You can bet countries like China will profit from Trump's stupidity or, to be more tactful, lack of long term planning.

    Seriously, who in business would make an agreement with someone they knew probably wouldn't honour it if they didn't like it after a while?

    How Denmark aims to run on clean energy - YouTube

    Which Countries Produce The Most Clean Energy? - YouTube

    As to me writing how stupid I think you are I'd never dream of being so crass

    Maybe though you or Scottl can decide which of you it would suit best to have this as your new car number plate.

    3JOH22A

  31. Likes art.h liked this post
  32. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1354
    Likes (Received)
    2721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tommy1010 View Post
    Read the agreements financial section. Its budget call for 200 billion USDs by the year 2020. Who do you think is going to pay most of that bill? Look how the NATO nations pay!!!!!

    Norquist: Tax Reform Could Bring 4% Growth Rate | Americans for Tax Reform
    Paris climate accord: Big business urges Trump to stick with it - May. 29, 217
    Exxon CEO Darren Woods wrote a personal letter to Trump earlier this month, urging him to stick to the deal. The U.S., he said, is "well positioned to compete" with the agreement in place and staying in means "a seat at the negotiating table to ensure a level playing field."
    Business leaders say the Paris deal, also called COP21, will help generate new jobs, limit damage from climate change and help assert American leadership on the global stage.
    "By expanding markets for innovative clean technologies, the agreement generates jobs and economic growth," business leaders wrote in a recent ad published in major newspapers. "U.S. companies are well positioned to lead in these markets. Withdrawing from the agreement will limit our access to them and could expose us to retaliatory measures."
    I don't know, man, I'm not yet buying what you're selling.

    The only thing slated in the financials I could find is Article 9, which is the part about "developed countries" giving support to "developing countries" to assist in adapting to the new regulations. To me, that means the leading countries pool together and put a little into those countries which, in effect, turns them into MARKETS where we can sell clean energy production, build plants, etc. A former job of mine was designing drilling fluid production facilities for offshore and onshore drilling. We built them in Mexico, Libya, Australia, Ghana, Ivory Coast... fucking anywhere with oil nearby. That was a LOT of money and a LOT of Americans put to work, even in Australia where there were plenty of developed-nation benefits (Don't tell them I admitted that)

    To me, it would foster the economic boom and further insert the USA's foot in the door as a clean energy technology provider.

    (of course, what's ignored so far are the gains and savings in the realm of health and agriculture in the form of a more stable and improved environment...)

  33. Likes dcsipo, Rudd, Screwmachine liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •