Trump Expected to Pull Out of Paris Climate Agreement

That's why nuclear is the true final solution.

Let's be real here. Coal still has a very low specefic energy value(kj/kg) and emits the most CO2 per kJ of energy obtained out of all commonly used energy sources that power our electric grid.


Also solar can be apart of the long term solution more than you think. If new battery technologies emerge that increase battery capacity signficantly, solar would be a long term viable option along with nuclear energy.

For now, natural gas is the viable short term solution along with green energy programs that supplement the electric grid with wind and solar. No reason to power our electric grid with coal. We have an abundance of natural gas to power our grids.

 

Interesting, especially, to note the result from independents.



How on Earth to interpret? Well, about 3 in 4 Republicans are probably basing their views on the accord as just strongly "anti-liberal." 80% of them like it? Then I hate it!

Independents are more basing views on the information (3 to 1 opposed to pull out). I guess if you're strongly right-wing, you explain this data as either "fake news, ABC!" or "Independents are brainwashed by liberal media!" or, in other words, anyone who disagrees with us is actually liberal.

Sad!

 

we can't

 

Coal is cheap and reliable, that's the big difference and important for a developing countries. You can't develop an economy with electricity that only runs some of the time. And to store electricity at a country level requires storage at level of TWh or more, which is only possible with giant reservoirs.

It's only beaten in residential costs by Denmark, a country who has even higher penetration of wind than German wind/solar combined.

I use Germany because it is often lauded as an example to follow and every year, there's bound to be a few news article every year about how Germany got so much electricity from wind or solar.

Solar has already plateaued in Germany even in spite of the significant reduction in costs. I would say that the trend is that once you reach a certain amount of penetration, there comes pushback from disgruntled voters (like in Ontario, Canada) or pushback from decreased reliability (as in South Australia).

 

My problem with these kinds of polls is that it assumes people are informed and I'd argue that most are not. So I would imagine most people would either make a partisan for or against type response or those who are more independent probably hear that Trump is pulling out of a climate change agreement and don't realize that it won't actually change anything. It would be like pulling out of an anti-rape agreement that didn't actually do anything and just cost you money. Stupid people would accuse you of being pro-rape if you did that and I think this issue is no different.

That said, I'm not speaking for Trump's views on climate change, I don't really know them (I'm not sure anyone really does, he kind of makes stuff up as he goes along it seems) and I don't really care to know them. My point is really only about the polls on this saying nothing more to me than who is doing the best job of spinning the story.

 

I would agree with that, the problem is many (if not most) of the environmental groups are against nuclear, so much so that they would shutdown nuclear first before worrying about CO2 emissions. After all, Germany chose coal over nuclear.

But not every country is so lucky. And even in the US you can have situations like a cold snap in the NE that bottlenecks NG distribution because of both electricity and heating demand, or in Southern California where the loss of Aliso Canyon means that it may not have enough natural gas to meet extended periods of peak demands.

 

Well, it could happen if certain assumptions are correct about the cause of the temperature increase and 100% of the nations that matter play ball with the efforts to stop the human contribution or if the earth starts moving into a cooling cycle for any of the reasons that would naturally occur....but yeah, it's certainly not a given and let's face it, countries like China and India have no plans to really scale things back unless it's the most advantageous route to take.

 

Much like many of the extremists here, Trump is just a troll...

After Paris, it’s clear the Trump GOP no longer cares about policies — they’re just trolls

Bob Cesca

In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook massacre, there was only one piece of gun control legislation that made it to a vote. The measure, introduced by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., would have closed the gun show and internet loopholes for firearm sales, and — well, that’s it. Nothing else was attached — no gun bans, no gun confiscations, nothing.

Despite the heartbreaking impact of Sandy Hook, this was the most ballsy piece of legislation the Senate could muster — and the amendment failed anyway, even though it enjoyed the support of 86 percent of the voters surveyed in 2013. Only 13 percent of the voters polled opposed the amendment. That last part is crucial. The Republican Senate voted down the legislation despite 86 percent support, including a 74 percent level of support from National Rifle Association members.

Why did the Republicans vote against an amendment that enjoyed such overwhelming support? It could have been the piles of cash and influence being injected into to the GOP’s haggard veins by the gun lobby. It could also have been an early indication that the Republican Party is more interested in trolling liberals than legislating based on sensible policy. Regardless of whether the congressional Republicans’ opposition to the Manchin-Toomey amendment was more than trollery, it’s obvious that, today, President Donald Trump’s Republican Party is all about supporting actions aimed simply to piss off the left, rather than authoring policy-based legislation that will objectively help make life easier for Americans.

After all, a significant chunk of Trump’s reputation is wrapped up in his obnoxious Twitter habit — a habit that seems to be partly inspired by the tone and content of “Fox & Friends,” mixed with his desperate need for attention. Even before he announced his presidential candidacy, Trump was a Twitter troll, and just about everything he does is geared toward fluffing his rally supporters, including the tormenting of liberals. For example, his desire to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act isn’t about constructing a better health care system; it’s about crapping all over the legacy of his predecessor, Barack Obama, and Obama’s supporters. It’s about revenge. And his people don’t seem to care that their health coverage will be among the first to be rescinded if the law passes as written. They don’t care because repealing Obamacare pisses off liberals.

Likewise, Trump’s posture on the climate crisis — quite likely driven by alt-right troll Steve Bannon — is obviously about trolling the left as well as the meanies in Europe who (rightfully) mocked him during his Mr. Magoo-like overseas trip. In his remarks about the U.S. pulling out of the Paris climate accords last week, Trump said he represents Pittsburgh and not Paris, even though the agreement was merely composed in Paris and isn’t a product of the administration of the newly elected Emmanuel Macron. I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that Trump’s decision on the Paris accord was made out of spite rather than a realistic assessment of the deal. Indeed, it’s fair to assume that Trump hasn’t read the agreement at all, beyond perhaps a one-page summary composed by his beleaguered staff — at best. All he knows is that it’s linked to Europe and Europe hates him, so screw it. He’s out.

What about public support for the agreement? Irrelevant — if you’re a Trump Republican, that is. Sure, 59 percent of voters are opposed to abandoning the deal, but in the age of Trump trolling, all that matters is that the president’s disciples are jazzed about pulling out, mainly because liberals are crushed by Trump’s decision. Who cares if nearly 6 in 10 voters support it? There are liberals and Europeans to troll.

Among the many trolling tactics on climate change is the old “but it’s snowing!” line. Most of us have beaten our faces against brick walls trying to swat down this one. Accordingly, Politico reported on Monday that Trump apparently said during a golf outing, “They can’t even get the weather report right, so how come they think they can get that right?”

Yeah. I know.

Made famous by Trump’s favorite television network, Fox News, and repeated by Trump’s favorite website, Drudge Report, this fallacy involves discrediting the scientific consensus on the climate crisis by appealing to the ignorance of low-information voters who don’t know the difference between climate and weather. Yes, it snowed in Boston last year, but that doesn’t mean the planet isn’t warming at an alarming rate. The fact that it’s chilly at your house in January doesn’t mean it’s not sweltering in the Southern Hemisphere, where, during our northern winters, it’s summertime. In other words, your backyard isn’t the globe. Sorry.

But Trump doesn’t care about those details because again his goal isn’t to understand policy, probably because he’s incapable of it. He’s not smart enough to grasp complex ideas like climatology and how the damage to the national and world economies due to the global warming will be apocalyptic. Conversely, the economic upsides to sanctioning new standards for emissions and innovating new technologies to do so will create innumerable jobs, with the United States potentially leading the world on the green economy. Trump doesn’t care because his fanboys deserve a treat and liberals must be punished for making fun of his hair and his inability to spell.

The good news is that leaders from both parties who agree that global warming is an existential crisis for all of humanity are moving forward despite Trump’s petty trolling. Hell, 147 countries have signed and ratified the agreement. Our president has instead chosen to allow those other nations, including North Korea, Afghanistan, China and Iraq, to take the lead on climate. The administration is willing to let the U.S. fall behind the rest of the world, including the poorest nations of the developing world, just to piss off the left.

Sure, American corporations, governors and even mayors are moving forward with the Paris standards. But as a nation, Trump is forcing the United States to walk away from a leadership role on this front, strictly to satisfy the blind rage and grievances of his loyalists. No amount of evidence proving that the climate crisis is real and no amount of polling in support of mitigating its impact will convince Trumpers otherwise. They can’t possibly win on the facts — and they know it — so trolling is the only weapon remaining in their arsenal.

 

Ah, good to see this If you don't agree with me then you are a "deplorable" tactic pulled yet again.....you guys still haven't learned your lesson it seems. Better wise up quickly or you'll cost yourselves yet another election.

 

Trump doesn't realize all the college students and bong-hitting "libtards" are actually going to vote in 2020. The terrified White Power crowd are losing their geriatric base by the day.

 

Sure they are....just like they did last year. I think instead of counting on unreliable, naive, and ignorant voting blocs like that Democrats would be wise to pick a candidate that people can actually get behind instead of trying to force garbage down their throats. One would think those same bong hitting college "libtards" would have gotten out to vote last year....but there was no one to vote for that they could really get behind.

As a nation, we have to do better than candidates like Trump and Hillary....if we can't, then there's no reason to complain when we get stuck with BS like them as president.

 

Jesus, Dude, I've told you before you're on my ignore list. But you still "debate" me. It's so obvious when I see your "ignored member" response pop up right after mine repeatedly.

Fine, I'll take you off ignore. Now you can quit the fake "debate" tactics.

As to what you wrote, no one cares about 2016 anymore.

 

I don't really pay attention to anyone who says that I'm on their ignore list, it means literally nothing to me.....also if I really was, you wouldn't be responding to me now would you kiddo? So now that BS is out of the way, you can either learn the lesson that I'm reminding you about, or be doomed to repeat the same mistakes. Doesn't matter to me really.

 

Oh wise man [ignore]

 

Clearly not, so why keep lying about it? Does it make you feel better?

You may not be able to help yourself when it comes to looking like a fool, but you can certainly do something about being a liar as well.

 

Here's how we'll do it: if you say something smart, I will not [ignore]

 

my take is a large portion of the people that agree wonder how you do climate prediction when you can't even get the weather right. I mean, that's so common sense and people who think otherwise is ill-informed.

 

The weather is different from the climate.

 

that's what they said, but i don't believe them for a min; they both deal with rain and temp.. common sense man

 

And the prediction of either has proven unreliable due to far too many variables to account for. The fact that they are different doesn't change that fact.