Paris' 2 CC's surrounded by the UN's olive leaves!

Moderator: Super Moderators

User avatar
Malaria_Kidd II
Pirate
Posts: 1112
Joined: 11-26-2015 03:51 PM

Re: The Brief Truth About Climate Change!

Post by Malaria_Kidd II » 09-30-2017 05:11 PM

The Truth About Climate Change by John Stossel :wink:




Global Warming Debate by Bill Nye and John Stossel :!:

Chill Out :!: 12:22




MK II
"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one but don't have it, you'll probably never need one again!" :oops: :wink: from 'Gun Shots' on Twitter/ Check out http://malarino.com/ it's 95% Turmeric :!: :mrgreen:

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 10332
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: SE WI
Contact:

Craig Richardson: The PCT Is Awful for the U.S. AND We’re Still Not Out

Post by Riddick » 10-01-2017 02:54 AM

On September 16, social media lit up with WSJ's news report the Administration is seeking ways to stay in the Paris Climate Treaty. Despite his June 1 announcement that he intended to withdraw, had the swamp finally gotten to President Trump?

The White House quickly shot the report down: The President had not reversed course on withdrawing from the Paris Climate Treaty, that is unless his team strikes “a better deal”.

This exercise was a reminder: The fight ahead of the President’s announced intent to withdraw was intense. He faced enormous pressure from leaders around the world, domestic and international corporate media, multinational corporations, universities, think tanks, and numerous other external forces. The loudest cries were from those who have a vested interest in the $1.5 trillion global climate change industry.

There was also organized internal pressure to flip-flop on his promise to the American people, from Obama holdovers, career staff and even some Trump appointees. The “Remain” crowd are a powerful group including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, former Goldman Sachs official, now chair of the National Economic Council Gary Cohn, and even Trump’s family.

The “Remain” position was strengthened by White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon’s departure in August. Bannon strongly and effectively articulated the case for withdrawing from the Paris deal.

It’s important to understand that the President’s June 1st announcement is not the finish line, but the starting gun for a race that will not conclude until November 5, 2019, when Trump can send a formal letter to the United Nations, given his chosen course of withdrawal. He could withdraw that letter any time before the 2020 elections, as he or a successor could at any time thereafter. This is at best a temporary solution.

Alternatively, the President could withdraw completely from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which Paris not only purports to amend, but clearly rewrites. This would automatically withdraw the U.S. from the Paris treaty effective a year from the date we inform the U.N.

Until the announcement is finalized, preferably in some more durable form than a letter, we remain party to the Paris treaty. As the recent “Remain” crowd “fake news” episode reminds us, powerful internal and external forces continue advocating reversal of Trump’s announced plans, working the entire Swamp — media, diplomats and Congress — winking at U.N. officials to not give up on getting the President to reverse course.

Another point to always consider is why we withdrew from the Paris Accord in the first place. President Trump said it best at his announcement: “The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers — who I love — and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production.”

He also alluded to its constitutional infirmity, which no “better deal” can remedy. End Paris, don’t mend it.

In addition to destroying the U.S. economy and killing jobs, Paris will exacerbate “Energy Poverty,” now ravaging Europe. President Obama used to say look to Europe if you want to see the what this agenda holds for the U.S.

We couldn’t agree more.

FULL STORY

User avatar
Malaria_Kidd II
Pirate
Posts: 1112
Joined: 11-26-2015 03:51 PM

Re: Paris' 2 CC's surrounded by the UN's olive leaves!

Post by Malaria_Kidd II » 10-01-2017 06:41 PM

"Alternatively, the President could withdraw completely from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which Paris not only purports to amend, but clearly rewrites. This would automatically withdraw the U.S. from the Paris treaty effective a year from the date we inform the U.N."

Well! That's a great idea. :D But we Americans pay through the nose now, and the 194 (minus 1) signing countries want us to pay even more later! While they wait, watch and then laugh at us again as WE bare the brunt of the cc costs for "changes". Any attempt$ at man-made cc cure$ ain't happening for a "fix" in our lifetime$ or our children'$ lifetime$! :wink:

Pollution controls are a whole different matter of fact in progress! :wink:

That piece was a super update to add to this cc topic so well viewed to date Riddick! Many thanks! :wink:


MK II :!:
Last edited by Malaria_Kidd II on 10-17-2017 09:03 AM, edited 1 time in total.
"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one but don't have it, you'll probably never need one again!" :oops: :wink: from 'Gun Shots' on Twitter/ Check out http://malarino.com/ it's 95% Turmeric :!: :mrgreen:

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 10332
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: SE WI
Contact:

Trump Admin Is Taking An Axe To Obama’s Failed Climate Plan

Post by Riddick » 10-13-2017 01:22 AM

The Trump administration is dismantling President Barack Obama’s climate legacy piece by piece, and this week it’s taking an axe to arguably the biggest piece. In an expected move, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt officially began the process of rolling back the incorrectly named Clean Power Plan.

If the Trump administration is intent on achieving 3 percent economic growth and rescinding costly regulations that carry negligible climate benefits—and if it is concerned about preserving our energy grid—the Clean Power Plan is a must-go.

Using a name that surely message-tested well, the Clean Power Plan had nothing to do with eradicating hazardous pollutants from power generation. The U.S. already has laws on the books to protect Americans’ health from emissions that have adverse environmental impacts. Instead, the Clean Power Plan regulated carbon dioxide, a colorless, odorless, nontoxic gas, because of its alleged contribution to climate change.

Environmentally, the climate impact of the Clean Power Plan would have been pointless. And the economic damages would have been felt through higher energy costs, fewer job opportunities, and fewer energy choices for consumers. FULL STORY

Post Reply

Return to “Environment in Crisis”