Trump Pulls Out of The Paris Accord

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by whell

His "idiot supporters" probably agree with him. The climate has been alternatively heating and cooling for billions of years.

What we "climate deniers" think is BS is the alarmism and hysteria that accompanies the debate, particularly when the beneficiaries of alarmism and hysteria tend to be big government advocates and billionaires.

The problem with your way of thinking, if you are wrong we all die!




Barney

[whell]

Originally Posted by Oerets

The problem with your way of thinking, if you are wrong we all die!

Barney

Such hyperbole is the problem in this debate, and distances us from workable solutions. We're no more or less likely to "die" if we put regulatory controls on our own ability to develop cost effective and long term solutions to our energy needs, while countries like China are India allowed under the Paris accords to ramp up their coal production and continue emissions.

France, the home of the Paris accords, generates 75% of its power with nuclear plants. Here in this country, the environmental lobby has choked off pursuit of nuclear power, which is currently the cleanest and safest method of power generation available.

The best way forward on this is not to make unenforceable agreements with other countries that are great for PR and do little to make this country's power generation more green, more efficient, more cost-effective, more safe or more sustainable. The best way forward is not to subsidize fledgling industries with shake business plans and good political connections.

The best way forward is to change our approach domestically and get out of our own way. Fracking is a great example. Natural gas is a cost effective and environmentally friendly alternative to coal. The left wants to shut it down. There are questions about safety that are solvable. We spend money combating the fracking industry, and then we waste money on over-regulation and government grants to companies that no longer exist. We should be providing companies with access to funding to help them cost effectively solving these issues to strengthen this industry.

I'm watching the talking heads on the Sunday shows this morning. One of them, on Face the Nation, just said that "solar is the cheapest energy source". Those kind of blanket statements are self serving, half true and highly misleading. Solar energy would be entirely ineffective her in the upper Midwest, where cloud cover is substantial particularly in the winter months. Sure, Michigan is deploying more solar generation on its grid, mostly due to state regs from the Granholm era that require an increase in renewable generation. Solar is a decent supplemental source, but its doubtful that it will ever be primary here.

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by whell

Such hyperbole is the problem in this debate, and distances us from workable solutions. We're no more or less likely to "die" if we put regulatory controls on our own ability to develop cost effective and long term solutions to our energy needs, while countries like China are India allowed under the Paris accords to ramp up their coal production and continue emissions.

.

Since the limits are voluntary, the US can do as it pleases, as well, and change the limits at will. There was no reason at all to pull out of this, except for Trump to score political points with his moronic base.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

Since the limits are voluntary, the US can do as it pleases, as well, and change the limits at will. There was no reason at all to pull out of this, except for Trump to score political points with his moronic base.

...which was apparently the driving factor behind Obama getting into it in the first place.

So, if there's no concrete reason to stay in, why stay in?