the paris agreement doesn't do anything on its own.
you can't compare it side by side with the policies that would be used to reach the paris agreement goals, then you'd be double counting those numbers

like, the chinese one-child policy was basically their entire contribution to the paris agreement since all they did was match their voluntary commitment to the already projected emissions reductions that would occur as their population age bubble kicked into senior citizen mode. Meanwhile the US contribution was to set a high bar that would require significant new mitigation efforts to achieve- expansions of programs listed there, like the unrealistic fuel standards for auto mileage. We weren't going to reach 54.5 miles per gallon average in new vehicles by 2025 if a prius can barely do that and its at the very top end right now

This post was edited by Goomshill on May 31 2018 05:44pm

thing is, what is the point of this agreement, when those before already failed

climate hysteria guys like fenderp are not interested in realistic solutions

even germany, despite wasting several hundred billion € we fail miserably to achieve all the goals our politicians have promised

Lol, we have "stupid" solutions as well, even capturing CO2 and stock it underground and create a product of some of it. A transitioning costly solution, that will still not reach the agreement. But a lot of efforts are being made on multiple fronts.

This post was edited by Knoppie on May 31 2018 05:54pm

atmospheric CO2 capture is not a serious proposal though as far as I know
even the sky darkening or ocean deacidification ideas seem more plausible for macroprojects.
the atmosphere is too large and gasses too dispersed to be captured in anything smaller than continent-sized forests or an ocean, at least then you can use the natural 500 year ocean cycle and only have to worry about a 2 dimension plane at the surface which makes the engineering a lot more realistic.

TIL: acknowledging manmade climate change and supporting reasonable initiatives aiming to fight it is 'hysteria'. denying it and deregulating your fossil fuel industry, however, is reasonable policy. i mean, it's not like it's already costing us trillions and we should do everything to limit the consequences, right? no, we've got all the time in the world to bicker over details and make exceptions for companies that got our leaders elected... (hilariously this is coming from the same people who are in constant hysteria about a 'religious war' and panicking about 'their culture' being under attack. propaganda makes for some strange prioritisation i guess.)

also, there apparently is no point in even making an effort if there is a possibility you miss your ambitious goals - because it doesn't seem to make a difference if you go from 100% to 95% or to 125% if your target was 90%.

just some solid right wing 'logic'...

The real problem is to many people.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/









/e This graph is accurate. That sites projected growth rate is pure conjecture.

This post was edited by Ghot on May 31 2018 07:22pm

why didn't that become a huge thing?

EU tariff on US manufactured cars: 10%
US tariff on EU manufactured cars: 2.5%

This is the current status quo that we call free trade.

Trump wants to raise our tariffs to match those of the Euros, essentially equalizing and creating some resemblance of fair trade and everyone is yelling trade war at the top of their lungs.

Logic in 2018, feels Orwellian to me

This post was edited by ofthevoid on May 31 2018 07:34pm

i already debunked the idiotic 'not a level playing field' / 'not fair trade', and 'car tariffs' talking points multiple times. here are the main points as a reminder:

- over 50% of our trade is completely tariff free.
- the average customs duty is under 2%
- our car tariffs are 10% (except you want to go back to acting like the VAT only applies to imported cars), yours are just 2.5%. however, on trucks (the most popular cars in the US) and vans your tariffs are 25%.
- US tariffs on train carriages is 14%, EU just 1.7%, US duty on peanuts is 130%, on raw tobacco 350%

so stop acting like america is taken advantage of by the EU, it's overall a very balanced trade relationship that will be significantly impacted by randomly slapping on tariffs for whole industries.
facts don't care about your false narratives, so please come up with an ACTUAL argument how this is good for american consumers and workers, or admit that it's a shortsighted political decision by trump to look like a strong leader in the eyes of a significant portion of his base in the very industries he's targeting.