RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris

RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

KenDckey -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 5:32:11 AM)
Where can we read this Accord?

thompsonx -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 7:14:08 AM)
ORIGINAL: Greta75 I hope they will fix their emissions, after all, they are killing their own people. So why do you think they have invested all that money in renewables if not to curb their emissions?

thompsonx -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 7:26:39 AM)
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 In sheer volume, China is still #1 world polluter. It tops every numerical chart. UNTIL they turn it around, the fact that they are the leaders in renewables is pretty moot. You can be leader all you like. But until that is put into practice and make a difference so you are no longer #1, it's empty rhetoric That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion. The article I cited shows that they have put their money where their mouth is.

thompsonx -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 7:48:35 AM)
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 ORIGINAL: thompsonx According to THIS wordpress report, the top 3 countries for green renewables are Denmark, Israel, and Sweden; followed by Finland, USA, Germany, Canada, South Korea, Ireland, with the UK coming in 10th place. China didn't figure in the top 10. Perhaps because your cite is from march of 2012 and mine is from june 2014 Wiki reports that the US is 2nd highest producer of electricity from renewable sources behind China. Your article also points out that more than half of the usa production comes from one state...california. It seems to me that China has pulled some strings behind the scenes to get themselves excluded from the main thrust of the climate change tenet while others who are also deserving are faced with producing plans to reduce greenhouse emissions. The article I cited shows that china's investment represents 61%of the total investment in renewables by developing countries, an that china invested more in renewable energy than all of europe in 2013. From the report: China leads the pack in sectors like solar, wind amid decline in global spending China remained the leading investor and proponent of renewable energy in 2013, even as global investment fell sharply, according to the report. The Global Status Report, released on Wednesday by the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century, said China invested more in renewable energy than all of Europe did in 2013. Although the renewables sector continues to offer huge growth potential in China, it also faces some constraints like overcapacity, experts said. New investment in renewables fell for the second consecutive year globally in 2013, partly because of uncertainties over incentives in Europe and the United States, as well as sharp reductions in technology costs. Investment from developed countries fell to the lowest level in four years, with Europe's investment in renewables falling by 44 percent in 2013 compared to the levels in 2012. Last year also saw an end to eight consecutive years of rising renewable energy investment in developing countries. Total investment by developing countries in renewables was $93 billion in 2013, down 14 percent from 2012. China's new investment in renewable energy was $56.3 billion in 2013, accounting for 61 percent of the developing-country investment in renewables. Lin Boqiang, director of the China Center for Energy Economics Research at Xiamen University, said growth was further depressed by the economic slowdown in developed countries and the rapid growth of the previous years. Ten years ago, most of the deployment and manufacturing of renewable energy occurred in Europe, the US and Japan. Since then, markets, manufacturing and investment have shifted to other regions, said the report. "China has become the world leader in renewable manufacturing and installed capacity, having increased investment in the sector nearly every year for the past decade," it said. Global new investment in renewable power and fuels was around $214.4 billion in 2013, according to data provided by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, down 14 percent relative to 2012, and 23 percent lower than the record level in 2011. China was home to about 24 percent of the world's renewable power capacity, including an estimated 260 gigawatts of hydropower. The solar PV market, however, had a record year. China saw spectacular growth, accounting for nearly one-third of global capacity added, followed by Japan and the United States. "As a result of the weak outward market, the solar installed capacity increased significantly in China during the past two years. But the industry still faces problems like overcapacity and excessive reliance on overseas markets," said Lin. Most of China's renewable energy investments were in solar and wind power projects. At the same time, it was also the leader in terms of the spending on utility-scale projects, followed distantly by the US and the United Kingdom. By the end of 2013, China, the United States, Brazil, Canada and Germany remained the top countries for total installed renewable electric capacity. New renewable power capacity surpassed new fossil fuel and nuclear capacity in China for the first time in 2013, the report said. Something stinks, and it ain't the local 'Tchai Kneze Phuk Yu' takeaway shop. Perhaps flossing would help?

Greta75 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 8:38:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Greta75 I hope they will fix their emissions, after all, they are killing their own people. So why do you think they have invested all that money in renewables if not to curb their emissions? IF they were serious about curbing their emissions, they should have tough and strict regulations on the kind of emissions their cars give out more than 20 years ago ! That is the very least they can do for a start. Took them freaking ages to do anything about it. Took their air to get into toxic levels to seriously enforce it seriously and more strictly, and tighten up their emissions car regulations. Vehicle exhaust is one of their main urban pollution! And it's 2015. Only now they are giving themselves till 2017 for stricter regulations?

tj444 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 10:22:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 China has been suffering national emergency of toxic level, orange air, this December. They had to shut down power plants, and ask cars not to plough the roads, to clear their air again. Their own people is suffering bad! I hope they will fix their emissions, after all, they are killing their own people. lol.. did you know that about 25% of the smog/pollution over Los Angeles comes from China??? I guess its not just those kewl icrap & other consumer products that China is exporting... dont go thinking it affects just China, ffs..

Greta75 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 10:28:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 lol.. did you know that about 25% of the smog/pollution over Los Angeles comes from China??? I guess its not just those kewl icrap & other consumer products that China is exporting... dont go thinking it affects just China, ffs.. There is no way the smog can travel all the way to the US, since US is still world number 2 in emissions. That's a long way for that smog to travel to!

DesideriScuri -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 10:33:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Where can we read this Accord? https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2646000-Draft-Paris-agreement.html That's likely it.

tj444 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 10:46:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 lol.. did you know that about 25% of the smog/pollution over Los Angeles comes from China??? I guess its not just those kewl icrap & other consumer products that China is exporting... dont go thinking it affects just China, ffs.. There is no way the smog can travel all the way to the US, since US is still world number 2 in emissions. That's a long way for that smog to travel to! OMG.. are you a scientist or some kinda expert? naw.. just smart as a brick.. "China's Pollution Is Creating Dangerous Smog in the U.S. “We’ve outsourced our manufacturing and much of our pollution, but some of it is blowing back across the Pacific to haunt us," It takes six days for Chinese pollution to travel across the Pacific and reach American shores, meaning that the toxins created from the production of iPhones and other gadgets in China could reach the West Coast before the actual products. As much as 24% of the sulfate on the West Coast, which forms acid rain, can be tied to Chinese emissions, per the study. It is the first to quantify China's pollution on the West Coast. http://mashable.com/2014/01/23/us-china-pollution/#lq.uonb1hGqq http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/12/3690724/china-exporting-air-pollution/ oh and travels to Alaska too.. http://www.adn.com/article/20140503/southcentral-alaska-skies-clouded-chinese-pollution

thompsonx -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 10:55:53 AM)
ORIGINAL: Greta75 That's a long way for that smog to travel to! Do you just post so you can say ignorant shit? http://www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-a-nuclear-war-without-a-war-the-unspoken-crisis-of-worldwide-nuclear-radiation/28870

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 11:07:11 AM)
How many times does it need to be said?? You can be leader in all sorts of things, but until you put it into practice so that it makes a real and practical difference to your world standings, being the leader means fuck all. No matter how you spin it thompson, China is still the world's #1 polluter by volume. Until their leadership manages to CUT that pollution down enough to knock them off the top step, it's just rhetoric. And being exempt, they don't even have to cut their emissions under this agreement; just report it! Fuck the growth potential - it needs to be practical and achieve something. At the moment, they are still #1 for pollution by a long margin and they don't have to fix it.

BamaD -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 11:47:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 How many times does it need to be said?? You can be leader in all sorts of things, but until you put it into practice so that it makes a real and practical difference to your world standings, being the leader means fuck all. No matter how you spin it thompson, China is still the world's #1 polluter by volume. Until their leadership manages to CUT that pollution down enough to knock them off the top step, it's just rhetoric. And being exempt, they don't even have to cut their emissions under this agreement; just report it! Fuck the growth potential - it needs to be practical and achieve something. At the moment, they are still #1 for pollution by a long margin and they don't have to fix it. And this has been the critical flaw tn every pollution agreement reached.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 11:48:35 AM)
For once Bama, I fully agree with you.

KenDckey -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 1:54:26 PM)
Oh good. It doesn't do anything except spend money and increases government on a world wide basis. Comittee after Comittee is agreed to but no one is legally bound to do anything and at some points current technologies are the only thing that can be use where others require up to date technologies are required. It does require world wide propoganda, which my include "beating up those that disagree with the propoganda" because they don't agree or refute the technology. It even goes into how we are going to control greenhouse gases in forests. (The only think I can think of to accomplish this is a huge bubble with scrubbersover them). No real mandates other than signatories would be legally required to "believe" in global warming which isn't enforceable. One provision says you can't hurt a community over global warming. Wonder how that is gonna work in the charcoal and coal and petroleum iindustries or industries that require this form of energy to operate.

thompsonx -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 3:56:31 PM)
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 How many times does it need to be said?? You can be leader in all sorts of things, but until you put it into practice so that it makes a real and practical difference to your world standings, being the leader means fuck all. That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion. No matter how you spin it thompson, China is still the world's #1 polluter by volume. The usa is the leader per capita by 300% and has done little to change that while china has. Until their leadership manages to CUT that pollution down enough to knock them off the top step, it's just rhetoric. And being exempt, they don't even have to cut their emissions under this agreement; just report it! Fuck the growth potential - it needs to be practical and achieve something. At the moment, they are still #1 for pollution by a long margin and they don't have to fix it. The facts say otherwise. The facts say that they are reducing their level of co2 voluntarily and not as a result of being forced by some outside entity. ETA (opinion): We all know that the US won't approve any real decent measures and kick the can down the road... again. China don't give a flying fuck about what anyone thinks of them. But does it goad them into any sort of positive action?? Fuck no!! As I have cited for you they have and they are taking positive action. Decreased coal use in China—whose carbon dioxide emissions account for nearly one-third of global emissions—was largely responsible for the decline in global emissions, the researchers concluded. After a decade of rapid growth, China's emissions rate slowed to 1.2 percent in 2014 and is expected to drop by approximately 3.9 percent in 2015, according to the report. More than half of new energy needs in China were met in 2014 from non-fossil fuel sources, such as hydro, nuclear, wind and solar power. http://insideclimatenews.org/news/07122015/global-carbon-emissions-rising-decades-decline-2015-study-climate-change-paris

bounty44 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 4:32:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Greta75 That's a long way for that smog to travel to! Do you just post so you can say ignorant shit? http://www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-a-nuclear-war-without-a-war-the-unspoken-crisis-of-worldwide-nuclear-radiation/28870 do you post just so you can insult people in general, and perhaps greta in particular? fyi---radiation is not smog. next time you want to ask greta about needing a "grownup"...maybe you will remember that... quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 OMG.. are you a scientist or some kinda expert? naw.. just smart as a brick.. "China's Pollution Is Creating Dangerous Smog in the U.S. “We’ve outsourced our manufacturing and much of our pollution, but some of it is blowing back across the Pacific to haunt us," It takes six days for Chinese pollution to travel across the Pacific and reach American shores, meaning that the toxins created from the production of iPhones and other gadgets in China could reach the West Coast before the actual products. As much as 24% of the sulfate on the West Coast, which forms acid rain, can be tied to Chinese emissions, per the study. It is the first to quantify China's pollution on the West Coast. http://mashable.com/2014/01/23/us-china-pollution/#lq.uonb1hGqq http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/12/3690724/china-exporting-air-pollution/ oh and travels to Alaska too.. http://www.adn.com/article/20140503/southcentral-alaska-skies-clouded-chinese-pollution tj---you will have to ask greta if she meant things the way I am taking it but, from what I can tell, she isn't questioning whether or not pollution can travel across an ocean, but rather, if smog can. smog is fog with smoke in it. fog and smoke dissipate more quickly compared to pollutants. so far as I can tell (and I didn't do an exhaustive look by a long shot), your articles have to do with pollutants, not smog. the pollutants in question contribute to the smog in los angeles, but the question is, is the smog itself from china travelling thousands of miles across the ocean.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 4:40:15 PM)
you just hit it right on the head Bounty................he is some kind of backward third world twack himself and he tries to smother this by being a keyboard bully and seems to have a particular down on Greta.........................He never grew out of the schoolyard. In fact I am wondering if he is still in it during term-time.

littleclip -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 4:41:51 PM)
as with any journey the first step is the hardest at least it is a agreement and once all the particulars are made public we can see what parts work well and what just don't and how to make it better. one way is to make coal burning stoves less polluting by creating a vortex of air spiraling in and continuing up the chimney. eating more goat and less pork helps as the pig farms make large amounts of gases ammonia and methane

thompsonx -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 4:45:30 PM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 do you post just so you can insult people in general, and perhaps greta in particular? You of all people should know that I believe in equal opportunity. Any fool who,like yourelf, stuffs both feet in their mouth and their head up their ass will have it pointed out. The fact that that offends you sounds to me like a personal problem...perhaps you could take it up with the chaplin. He is paid to give a shit about your problems, I am not

thompsonx -> RE: Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris (12/14/2015 4:52:48 PM)
ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 you just hit it right on the head Bounty................he is some kind of backward third world twack himself and he tries to smother this by being a keyboard bully Your definition of a keyboard bully seems to be someone who does not agree with you. If you do not care for the way folks call a "spade a spade or a phoquing shovel" down here in the dungeon perhaps you would be more comfortable in one of the more moderated forums. and seems to have a particular down on Greta. Few on this board, since the departure of the idiot from idaho, are as capable as she in spouting gysers of ofal. It may be tasty to you but some with a more refined tast find it less than palatible.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125