Jump to content

187 Mayors adopting Paris Climate Accord despite U.S. pulling out.


Recommended Posts

Daily Trump does more and more things to alienate the American people.  I look at Trump Tower in Las Vegas, it's sits way away from the action of the strip.  He couldn't get a gaming license because of all his failed casinos.  LV didn't want him.  That's saying a lot because they welcome all job/tax revenue producing businesses.

nevada-las-vegas-trump-tower-casino-and-

Edited by Number9
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Have you seen those two dorky sons? He doesn't always know when to pullout!

Yes, uninformed. Yes, new programs. They exceeded 25% last year. Pay attention, bitch ! China has twice the amount of the US installed in renewable gigawatts. They are actually dominating in rene

I love the far right members  of this board. It's funny seeing a genuinely articulate and seemingly well educated guy with such strong (often wrong, or at least sourced from dodgy places) partisan vie

1 minute ago, Number9 said:

Daily Trump does more and more things to alienate the American people.  I look at Trump Tower in Las Vegas, it's sits way away from the action of the strip.  He couldn't get a gaming license because of all his failed casinos.  LV didn't want him.  That's saying a lot because they welcome all job/tax producing businesses.

nevada-las-vegas-trump-tower-casino-and-

I had friends who were part of a class action lawsuit against that LV Trump Tower's planned 2nd phase due to all the pre-sale/build marketing misrepresentations (lies).  They won.  Not altogether uncommon in properties like this, but pretty much a norm for Trumps props.  (Long history of making claims about his buildings - exaggerated height for example - that simply are not true).  In this case, their "55th" story unit purchased on pre-sale turned out to be in the mid 30s.  Know how buildings often leave out the 13th floor due to bad luck?  Well Trump left out all the Chinese unlucky numbers, started the residential flooring numbers at an absurd discrepancy from reality, so on.  Tons of lies about sale numbers and more. Never was built due to investor pull out and then falling market.

To be fair, same friends have stayed in a one of his properties elsewhere and said it was a great experience.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, efus50 said:

Stop driving your dam car stop running your Air Conditioner

Ah, I see the Trump brigade has brought on another high quality poster. 

 

Seriously, does it not cause some introspection among the Trump apologists on this board when half the people on your side are writing posts at a 4th 3rd grade level?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TitanDuckFan said:

So where is the conflict?

Trump didn't say he was opposed to reducing greenhouse gasses.  He said he was opposed to paying for others to do it.

Especially when they won't really do it at all.

China and India together use roughly 8 TIMES as much coal as the US, and much of that is lignite, the dirty soft coal that is far more polluting than the anthracite we use most of.  India's coal is almost 100% soft coal.

Both are heavily reliant on coal as their primary energy/electrical source, and both have plans to expand its use.

While we have curbed coal use by shifting to natural gas.  But the anthracite deposits we're sitting on could (conceivably) at least be mined and sold to India to replace their use of the dirtier lignite, allowing our coal miners to return to work, and improving global air quality in the process.

 

So if the mayors want to uphold the targets of the Paris accords within their own city limits that's fine.  Unless and until the voters in those cities decide they don't want to follow that doctrine.

China and India combined have almost exactly 8 times as many people. The average American uses 4 times more electricity than the average Chinese and 24 times more than the avg Indian. I could go on about how the US industrialized a century ago and India is still early in the process, and therefor will experience rapidly increasing energy demand, but I'm sure you're already aware and are just choosing (subconsciously?) to ignore the elephant in the room while chasing down tangents, as you so often do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Titans_Win_Again said:

China and India combined have almost exactly 8 times as many people. The average American uses 4 times more electricity than the average Chinese and 24 times more than the avg Indian. I could go on about how the US industrialized a century ago and India is still early in the process, and therefor will experience rapidly increasing energy demand, but I'm sure you're already aware and are just choosing (subconsciously?) to ignore the elephant in the room while chasing down tangents, as you so often do.

There is no elephant in the room.  Unless you want to reduce our standard of living to that of the poor and rural Indian population.

We're not near as dependent of coal, or even fossil fuels in general, as India and China are for their power though.

The object for us shouldn't be to step back, but for them to step up.  Can they/we do that without $pending our trillion$, is the question.  They want to step up in terms of their standard of living and production.  So how can we help them do that, without spending hundreds of billions or trillions on an "agreement" that is not a treaty and was never ratified per our constitutional mandate(s)?

But domestically, we do have alternatives other than strictly renewable sources.  Currently our ability to produce more hydro is being restricted, as is the nuclear option.  Over environmental concerns that don't affect the global environment.  We lead at those.  China and India aren't worried about salmon and snail darters.  But they know coal is easier and cheaper anyway.

Regardless of population numbers, if we're talking about carbon and other emissions, the factor of 8 times as much coal matters, especially considering the incentives outlined in the Paris agreement came out of our pocket, and there was no downside or penalty for countries with coal-based power, that don't limit their emissions in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

There is no elephant in the room.  Unless you want to reduce our standard of living to that of the poor and rural Indian population.

We're not near as dependent of coal, or even fossil fuels in general, as India and China are for their power though.

The object for us shouldn't be to step back, but for them to step up.  Can they/we do that without $pending our trillion$, is the question.  They want to step up in terms of their standard of living and production.  So how can we help them do that, without spending hundreds of billions or trillions on an "agreement" that is not a treaty and was never ratified per our constitutional mandate(s)?

But domestically, we do have alternatives other than strictly renewable sources.  Currently our ability to produce more hydro is being restricted, as is the nuclear option.  Over environmental concerns that don't affect the global environment.  We lead at those.  China and India aren't worried about salmon and snail darters.  But they know coal is easier and cheaper anyway.

Regardless of population numbers, if we're talking about carbon and other emissions, the factor of 8 times as much coal matters, especially considering the incentives outlined in the Paris agreement came out of our pocket, and there was no downside or penalty for countries with coal-based power, that don't limit their emissions in the future.

"Unless you want to reduce our standard of living to that of the poor and rural Indian population."

What is your basis for this comment? Are all the Western European nations that enthusiastically embrace renewables over coal headed towards economic ruin? Of course not, solar, wind, etc are the future. Coal is only marginally less expensive, in some cases, if you fail to incorporate the costs of environmental damage from coal ash and air pollution. The inherent disadvantage of having to mine and transport fuel means coal simply doesn't have the  same potential to achieve high levels of efficiency like wind or solar. 

"The object for us shouldn't be to step back, but for them to step up."

While we pull out of non-binding agreements and our President tries to bring about a pro-coal revolution? What kind of example is that? Aren't we supposed to be the world leader?

"China and India aren't worried about salmon and snail darters."

So, we should be more like them and trash our country? Would you rather live in Beijing levels of smog for the sake of cheaper electricity?

"Regardless of population numbers, if we're talking about carbon and other emissions, the factor of 8 times as much coal matters."

WTF, you don't just get to throw in the "regardless of population" caveat if the whole point is comparing countries energy use. 

"there was no downside or penalty for countries with coal-based power, that don't limit their emissions in the future."

Then what is achieved by pulling out? Other than a big FU to Europe, and pissing away our role as world leader.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TitanDuckFan said:

There is no elephant in the room.  Unless you want to reduce our standard of living to that of the poor and rural Indian population.

We're not near as dependent of coal, or even fossil fuels in general, as India and China are for their power though.

The object for us shouldn't be to step back, but for them to step up.  Can they/we do that without $pending our trillion$, is the question.  They want to step up in terms of their standard of living and production.  So how can we help them do that, without spending hundreds of billions or trillions on an "agreement" that is not a treaty and was never ratified per our constitutional mandate(s)?

But domestically, we do have alternatives other than strictly renewable sources.  Currently our ability to produce more hydro is being restricted, as is the nuclear option.  Over environmental concerns that don't affect the global environment.  We lead at those.  China and India aren't worried about salmon and snail darters.  But they know coal is easier and cheaper anyway.

Regardless of population numbers, if we're talking about carbon and other emissions, the factor of 8 times as much coal matters, especially considering the incentives outlined in the Paris agreement came out of our pocket, and there was no downside or penalty for countries with coal-based power, that don't limit their emissions in the future.

Uninformed nonsense. China is actually leading the world in renewable gigawatts installed and they just launched new programs for the development of concentrated solar power and wind energy (btw they invest approx. $400 billion in this program which will create more than 13 million jobs by 2020 !). The problem in China is that there are just so many people. Of course they still depend on fossil energy but they view renewables as energy security. They have already stepped up and will continue to do so.

But yeah, keep thinking and yelling "make america great again", while the world laughs at the US and the US loses its world leadership.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Titans_Win_Again said:

"Regardless of population numbers, if we're talking about carbon and other emissions, the factor of 8 times as much coal matters."

WTF, you don't just get to throw in the "regardless of population" caveat if the whole point is comparing countries energy use. 

"there was no downside or penalty for countries with coal-based power, that don't limit their emissions in the future."

Then what is achieved by pulling out? Other than a big FU to Europe, and pissing away our role as world leader.

And you don't get to shame the American people into the level of industry or the standard of living of a 3rd world country.

Renewables are great, and someday battery technology may someday provide the world a secure way of relying on it when the sun isn't shining and the wind doesn't blow, without doing environmental harm of its own.  But for the moment countries like India and China are seeking the cheaper more economically viable route.  No city in the US suffers the level of air quality Beijing does, yet they're still bringing coal plants online.

And BTW, WTF do you think brought us to the pinnacle of world leadership?  Our industry. Our taxation levels.  Our free market, that fostered innovation in fields like medicine and farming/food production and transportation and communications and yes, energy production.

You guys act like that shit happened in a vacuum.  Or in a university.  Newsflash, most of it happened because it was market driven.  Was the grid and national electrification a mistake?  Are you really going to make that argument? (rhetorical)

And if you don't understand the financial cost to the taxpayer of staying in, then you may not understand what was achieved by pulling out.  We didn't get into our leadership position by paying the bills other countries racked up.

But that doesn't really surprise me.  You're as caught up in your favorite talking point as Tux is his.    "Trump sucks."

Yeah we get that,... 

 

So show us the downside.  Beyond your perceived notion that we've somehow abrogated our leadership of the free world, just because we closed our wallet.

Edited by TitanDuckFan
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, NoDohNuts said:

Uninformed nonsense. China is actually leading the world in renewable gigawatts installed and they just launched new programs for the development of concentrated solar power and wind energy (btw they invest approx. $400 billion in this program which will create more than 13 million jobs by 2020 !). The problem in China is that there are just so many people. Of course they still depend on fossil energy but they view renewables as energy security. They have already stepped up and will continue to do so.But yeah, keep thinking and yelling "make america great again", while the world laughs at the US and the US loses its world leadership.

Uninformed?

New programs you say? Gee that's great.  Maybe someday they'll get up over 25% of their power produced by renewables.

Of course, if you take hydropower out of the equation, the rest of their renewables drops to a paltry 5% or so:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China#Renewable_electricity_overview

 

Electricity production (GWh) in China by source, 2008-2014[2]
Year Total Generation Fossil Nuclear Renewable Total generated by renewables (includes waste, based on table) Estimated  % generated by renewables (based on table)
Coal Oil Gas Waste Hydro Wind Biofuels Solar PV Solar thermal Geothermal Tide
2008 3,481,985 2,743,767 23,791 31,028 68,394 0 585,187 14,800 14,715 152 0 144 7 615,005 17.66%
2009 3,741,961 2,940,751 16,612 50,813 70,134 0 615,640 26,900 20,700 279 0 125 7 663,651 17.74%
2010 4,207,993 3,250,409 13,236 69,027 73,880 9,064 722,172 44,622 24,750 699 2 125 7 801,441 19.05%
2011 4,715,761 3,723,315 7,786 84,022 86,350 10,770 698,945 70,331 31,500 2,604 6 125 7 814,288 17.27%
2012 4,994,038 3,785,022 6,698 85,686 97,394 10,968 872,107 95,978 33,700 6,344 9 125 7 1,019,238 20.41%
2013 5,447,231 4,110,826 6,504 90,602 111,613 12,304 920,291 141,197 38,300 15,451 26 109 8 1,127,686 20.70%
2014 5,678,945 4,115,215 9,517 114,505 132,538 12,956 1,064,337 156,078 44,437 29,195 34 125 8 1,307,170

23.02%

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

And you don't get to shame the American people into the level of industry or the standard of living of a 3rd world country.

Renewables are great, and someday battery technology may someday provide the world a secure way of relying on it when the sun isn't shining and the wind doesn't blow, without doing environmental harm of its own.  But for the moment countries like India and China are seeking the cheaper more economically viable route.  No city in the US suffers the level of air quality Beijing does, yet they're still bringing coal plants online.

And BTW, WTF do you think brought us to the pinnacle of world leadership?  Our industry. Our taxation levels.  Our free market, that fostered innovation in fields like medicine and farming/food production and transportation and communications and yes, energy production.

You guys act like that shit happened in a vacuum.  Or in a university.  Newsflash, most of it happened because it was market driven.  Was the grid and national electrification a mistake?  Are you really going to make that argument? (rhetorical)

And if you don't understand the financial cost to the taxpayer of staying in, then you may not understand what was achieved by pulling out.  We didn't get into our leadership position by paying the bills other countries racked up.

But that doesn't really surprise me.  You're as caught up in your favorite talking point as Tux is his.    "Trump sucks."

Yeah we get that,... 

 

So show us the downside.  Beyond your perceived notion that we've somehow abrogated our leadership of the free world, just because we closed our wallet.

More non sequiturs and pointless tangents while avoiding the core points. Your posts are like a mirage, wearing the facade of an earnest attempt to debate in good faith while being only a vacuous cloud of deflection and contradictions.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Of course, if you take hydropower out of the equation, the rest of their renewables drops to a paltry 5% or so:

 

 

 
             
                     
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               
                               

Of course, if you take Murray's 80 yard run out of the equation, the rest of his yards drops to a paltry 18 or so.

See how stupid that sounds?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...