U.S. Politics

[dcm1602]

The question was not about me. It was about your obvious racist hatred of President Barack Obama, the last legitimate President of the United States before it became a controlled colony of the Russian Federation in 2017

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Mod edit - let's try and keep at least a pretence of civilized discourse

[Johnny English]

I'm not talking about Trump, I'm talking about the deal.

And yes there's two assumptions one could make that nations will attempt to follow the rules of deal or they won't. If they won't it's worthless and does nothing anyway so we should ignore that assumption.

If countries are following the rules and China and India could grow anyway they want for 13 years it gives them an economic advantage over the rest of the world, as they're able to utilize the cheapest sources of energy regardless of Co2 emissions (while other nations need to keep them in mind)

And since China and India are getting these advantages given to them because that's how the deal was made they should have to pay a price. That price should be accountability after their 13 year grace period.

The United States shouldn't need to have these punishments too, because we're not being awarded with a special 13 year grace period like China and India. We will be expected to immediately comply with the standards, not to mention we obviously will probably be the number one financer of clean energy in other countries like India because that's how this excrement always works.

I don't see how that's unreasonable. The deal was made to cater to them, they should at least be forced to do their part

It's a good faith agreement, signed on a voluntary basis by almost every country in the world given the importance to everyone of making sure that there continues to be a planet for us to live on. There's no sensible reason to think that China and India aren't fully committed to doing their part.

[Johnny English]

And why do you keep saying that China and India don't have to do anything until 2030? I don't see that in the Agreement. Are you just parroting Tommy again?

[dcm1602]

It's a good faith agreement, signed on a voluntary basis by almost every country in the world given the importance to everyone of making sure that there continues to be a planet for us to live on. There's no sensible reason to think that China and India aren't fully committed to doing their part.

People and nations have always done what's in their individual best interests. I think it's completely naieve to assume every nation is fully committed to doing their part, especially when it comes down to money which it absolutely will. If nations are gifted special conditions like China and India its completely reasonable to expect that to come at a cost

[Johnny English]

People and nations have always done what's in their individual best interests. I think it's completely naieve to assume every nation is fully committed to doing their part, especially when it comes down to money which it absolutely will. If nations are gifted special conditions like China and India its completely reasonable to expect that to come at a cost

What special conditions are you talking about?

[AlioTheFool]

China is the biggest polluter in the world. Under this agreement China can increase there emissions all they want until 2030, then they're supposed to start decreasing them thereafter. However there's absolutely nothing to hold them accountable to that, so they can just do whatever they want. Same thing with India

Hell under this agreement absolutely nobody can be held to anything. But the United States being the United States would at least to attempt to do their part, while most of the other countries do whatever the freak they want.

If it was a concrete agreement with specifications that's a whole different game. But this has different standards for different parties, with no concrete anything

Will you stop with this already?

I've posted it a few times already and not called you out directly on it, but China has demonstratively reduced their emissions already. What they "can" do isn't what they're actually doing.

You're making a hypothetical argument in direct contrast to reality to support your point.

[Laxin]

China is the biggest polluter in the world. Under this agreement China can increase there emissions all they want until 2030, then they're supposed to start decreasing them thereafter. However there's absolutely nothing to hold them accountable to that, so they can just do whatever they want. Same thing with India

Hell under this agreement absolutely nobody can be held to anything. But the United States being the United States would at least to attempt to do their part, while most of the other countries do whatever the freak they want.

If it was a concrete agreement with specifications that's a whole different game. But this has different standards for different parties, with no concrete anything

China amounts for the most emissions, but on a per capita basis, the U.S. is far an away the biggest offender. China and India do not have any specific deadlines until 2030, but they have set a goal to reach at 2030. Meaning, they have to make strides to reach that goal in the meantime. They can't just keep increasing emissions with no regard, then 2029 rolls around and meet their goal. China pledged to have a 20% increase in non-fossil fuel use, which cannot happen overnight, as well as reduce carbon reliance by 60-65% from 2005 numbers. India has pledged to reduce emissions by 2030 by 33-35%. Once again, this cannot happen overnight and must (and will) be something that have to start working towards now.

... As of now, China and India have both started to work towards their goals, and are apparently ahead of projected schedule.

[dcm1602]

What special conditions are you talking about?

They are designated as developing nations, so they're not held to the same standards as say the united states

[Johnny English]

They are designated as developing nations, so they're not held to the same standards as say the united states

Yeah, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The Kyoto Protocol placed binding commitments on Annex 1 countries. Paris doesn't do that, at all. It requires each country to submit a Nationally Determined Contribution, which is their own individual plan to deliver upon the mutual aims of the Agreement, and progress of each is reviewed in 2023.

You're parroting someone else and making yourself look a bit silly.

[dcm1602]

And maybe I misunderstood the way the China 2030 thing was presented, so I could totally be wrong on that.

But the way Obama forced the United States wasn't right either, as an agreement like this should be done with due diligence.

I personally still don't like the fact that there is nothing concrete with zero accountability built into the whole thing. And climate warriors should feel the same way, because if you don't have clear rules  odds are you won't be successful.

[dcm1602]

Yeah, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The Kyoto Protocol placed binding commitments on Annex 1 countries. Paris doesn't do that, at all. It requires each country to submit a Nationally Determined Contribution, which is their own individual plan to deliver upon the mutual aims of the Agreement, and progress of each is reviewed in 2023.

You're parroting someone else and making yourself look a bit silly.

Laxin mentioned it above in more details how China and India have no deadlines until 2030

[Johnny English]

Laxin mentioned it above in more details how China and India have no deadlines until 2030

Show me where that is.

https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf

[Miamipuck]

I love how everyone is arguing with DCM as if he has a well researched defensible opinion. Has he ever had that here?


Like maybe once when Heismanberg called him a bundle of sticks and they made dinner plans.

[dcm1602]

I love how everyone is arguing with DCM as if he has a well researched defensible opinion. Has he ever had that here?


Like maybe once when Heismanberg called him a bundle of sticks and they made dinner plans.

It was breakfast plans

OK thanks

[dcm1602]

Show me where that is.

https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf

In order to achieve the long-term temperature goal set out in Article 2,
Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as
possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties,
and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available
science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources
and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century, on the
basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to
eradicate poverty.