America’s Carbon-Dioxide Emissions Set Records under Trump!
- Thread starter DawnODay
- Start date
gunthernehmen
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Posts
- 2,907
I have to agree with you there. He was pretty sanctimonious.
gunthernehmen
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Posts
- 2,907
:bow:
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
When President Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accords, liberals went ape nuts. America, they said, had just signed the death decree of the world....
But a funny thing happened on the way to the end of the world. Instead of America causing irreversible global warming, harmful greenhouses gases that some scientists say causes climate change actually decreased during Trump’s first year in office....
he EPA report showed "overall decreases across sectors and that total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions reported decreased by 2.7 percent from 2016 to 2017."
“Thanks to President Trump’s regulatory reform agenda, the economy is booming, energy production is surging, and we are reducing greenhouse gas emissions from major industrial sources,” said EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler. “These achievements flow largely from technological breakthroughs in the private sector, not the heavy hand of government. The Trump Administration has proven that federal regulations are not necessary to drive CO2 reductions. While many around the world are talking about reducing greenhouse gases, the U.S. continues to deliver, and today’s report is further evidence of our action-oriented approach.”
The report also said emissions from larger power plants dropped 4.5% since 2016.
Gore said in June 2017 that Trump's decision to withdraw from the Accords was a threat to humanity. "I think it was reckless," Gore said. "I think it was indefensible. It undermines America's standing in the world. It threatens the ability of humanity to solve the climate crisis in time."
But as it turns out, the U.S. is still leading the world, even without the Accords, which was non-binding and lacked an enforcement clause to allow the United Nations to levy penalties on any nation that failed to meet environmental benchmarks.
Another report released in September by the U.S. Energy Information Administration found that carbon emissions from major energy sources dropped almost 1% overall, the lowest level for U.S. emissions since 1993.
And according to the June 2018 BP Statistical Review of Global Energy, the United States led the world last year in reducing carbon emissions across the board — despite Trump pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accords in 2017....
Strangely enough, Canada, Spain, the European Union, and China — all signatories to the Accords negotiated by the United Nations — saw significant increases in carbon dioxide emissions. China released 120 million more tons of carbon dioxide into the air in 2017 than in 2016. The EU made up for America's decline, releasing 40 million more tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
AEI credits the use of natural gas and the practice of fracking with the U.S.'s carbon emissions decrease....
But a funny thing happened on the way to the end of the world. Instead of America causing irreversible global warming, harmful greenhouses gases that some scientists say causes climate change actually decreased during Trump’s first year in office....
he EPA report showed "overall decreases across sectors and that total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions reported decreased by 2.7 percent from 2016 to 2017."
“Thanks to President Trump’s regulatory reform agenda, the economy is booming, energy production is surging, and we are reducing greenhouse gas emissions from major industrial sources,” said EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler. “These achievements flow largely from technological breakthroughs in the private sector, not the heavy hand of government. The Trump Administration has proven that federal regulations are not necessary to drive CO2 reductions. While many around the world are talking about reducing greenhouse gases, the U.S. continues to deliver, and today’s report is further evidence of our action-oriented approach.”
The report also said emissions from larger power plants dropped 4.5% since 2016.
Gore said in June 2017 that Trump's decision to withdraw from the Accords was a threat to humanity. "I think it was reckless," Gore said. "I think it was indefensible. It undermines America's standing in the world. It threatens the ability of humanity to solve the climate crisis in time."
But as it turns out, the U.S. is still leading the world, even without the Accords, which was non-binding and lacked an enforcement clause to allow the United Nations to levy penalties on any nation that failed to meet environmental benchmarks.
Another report released in September by the U.S. Energy Information Administration found that carbon emissions from major energy sources dropped almost 1% overall, the lowest level for U.S. emissions since 1993.
And according to the June 2018 BP Statistical Review of Global Energy, the United States led the world last year in reducing carbon emissions across the board — despite Trump pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accords in 2017....
Strangely enough, Canada, Spain, the European Union, and China — all signatories to the Accords negotiated by the United Nations — saw significant increases in carbon dioxide emissions. China released 120 million more tons of carbon dioxide into the air in 2017 than in 2016. The EU made up for America's decline, releasing 40 million more tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
AEI credits the use of natural gas and the practice of fracking with the U.S.'s carbon emissions decrease....
J. Curl, AL GORE WAS WRONG (AGAIN): Greenhouse Gas Emissions Dropped Nearly 3% In Trump’s First Year, Dailt Wire (Oct. 28, 2018) (emphasis added).
Last edited:
gunthernehmen
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Posts
- 2,907
The problem with Trumps approach is that it doesn't create opportunities for self proclaimed experts to make million$ scamming/swindling real producers with strategies to do this or that.
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
You mean the racist Daily Wire? The one that's run by "Big" Ben Shapiro? The one who apologized for posting racist shit?
You're such a racist corporate shill that you're listening to the American Enterprise Institute? You do know that they hate the people most affected by global warming, right?
Also, have you even seen your buddy "Big" Ben Shapiro get his ass handed to him in a debate? You should, it's funny.
Going to be a shitty week for racist dawn.
Kirkrapine
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2018
- Posts
- 5,538
Kirkrapine
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2018
- Posts
- 5,538
gunthernehmen
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Posts
- 2,907
You need to be very, very careful not to fall into the dangerous fallacy of producerism.
How about the false industries that spring up to service these politically generated issues like Y2K bug that had companies spending millions to prove they were addressing it, when the issues were mainly pretty easy to solve.
Or the Climate Scarologists that spawned the solar farm expansions that make money only because they're funded through government incentives? Except nobody is thinking about what to do with all those panels when they wear out in 20 - 30 years and become hazardous waste.
My use of the term was more to distinguish the predators from their prey, rather than promote an economic viewpoint.
Urguycliff
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Posts
- 225
As your own charts show, China is the worst offender of pollution on this planet. But the Soros Democrats, look at Gov. Brown of CA, want to do business with China and like CA they are responsible for the increase in pollution in this country. The Democrats are the party of the corrupt rich and of the far left and far right countries of this world who are the real enemies of our planet. Why don't Soros and the Clinton's who have billions of ill gotten loot use some of that money to help the planet and its people?
The Democrats have sent business to third world countries by way of over taxing, etc. in this country. These counties, like Mexico and China and India don't have any care or concern for pollution or safety of their workers. The Democrats have always been the slave party and slavery makes the corrupt rich like Soros and Waters and Princess Nancy of California richer. The Clinton's and Bush family used Haiti as their plantation.
Get a kick out of the Hollywood dummies and people like Gore who "preach" Global Warming while riding around in private jets and big cars and have huge castles using up lots of carbon based fuels. But then the left are known as liars, just look at the media and their rantings in Washington.
In California our great governor (Holden) has had his puppet Brown pass laws for high density building in all the cities of the state, causing greater automotive traffic and higher taxes and crime rates as well as pollution and destruction of green zones like river beds. Another fake response to the "fight" by the Soros Democrats. Tent cities in urban areas that end up like San Francisco. A place you can't walk around with out stepping in human waste and drug gear.
Please no more lies. Instead why don't you elect Americans instead of Communists who can do something and force the rest of the world (unlike that stupid treaty that Clinton and Obama made giving the Communist and third world countries freedom to pollute while destroying the economy of their own county) real guidelines.
The Democrats have sent business to third world countries by way of over taxing, etc. in this country. These counties, like Mexico and China and India don't have any care or concern for pollution or safety of their workers. The Democrats have always been the slave party and slavery makes the corrupt rich like Soros and Waters and Princess Nancy of California richer. The Clinton's and Bush family used Haiti as their plantation.
Get a kick out of the Hollywood dummies and people like Gore who "preach" Global Warming while riding around in private jets and big cars and have huge castles using up lots of carbon based fuels. But then the left are known as liars, just look at the media and their rantings in Washington.
In California our great governor (Holden) has had his puppet Brown pass laws for high density building in all the cities of the state, causing greater automotive traffic and higher taxes and crime rates as well as pollution and destruction of green zones like river beds. Another fake response to the "fight" by the Soros Democrats. Tent cities in urban areas that end up like San Francisco. A place you can't walk around with out stepping in human waste and drug gear.
Please no more lies. Instead why don't you elect Americans instead of Communists who can do something and force the rest of the world (unlike that stupid treaty that Clinton and Obama made giving the Communist and third world countries freedom to pollute while destroying the economy of their own county) real guidelines.
Kirkrapine
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2018
- Posts
- 5,538
None of those you describe are or were "predators."
spankednaked
Experienced
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2015
- Posts
- 74
Cyprus takes number one in the category of "development of emissions," meaning it's doing the best job of cutting down on greenhouse gases year over year—and it is a result of direct contact with the devastating effects of climate change. A series of debilitating droughts have hit the island over the past decade, and as a result, Cyprus has stepped up its game. Considering emissions from Cyprus increased by 52 percent between 1990 and 2012, but have been decreasing an average of three percent every year since 2008, the Cypriots are clearly doing something right.
On April 21, 2017, the United Kingdom celebrated its first 24-hour period without coal power since the Industrial Revolution. It came after the government committed to shutter its last coal-fueled plant by 2025. While there's plenty of work still to be done, it's a major achievement for a country whose capital is nicknamed "The Big Smoke".
Sweden gets points for relatively low carbon emissions and a highly efficient recycling system—in fact, Sweden is so good at recycling it has to import garbage to keep the recycling plants going. While time will tell if the Scandinavian country can continue to put its money where its mouth is, the report applauds the country's goal of shifting to 100 percent renewable energy by 2040. Turns out, work-life balance isn't the only thing the Swedes do better than we do.
France takes the highest possible spot in the rankings, in large part due to the leadership role it took in coordinating the Paris climate accord. Its continued commitment to the goals outlined in the agreement was on display in the hours following the U.S.'s decision to pull out of the agreement when in a now-viral video, newly elected Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron invited U.S. climate scientists to France before ending his address with the words "Make our planet great again." Touché.
https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/countries-doing-the-most-to-fight-climate-change
On April 21, 2017, the United Kingdom celebrated its first 24-hour period without coal power since the Industrial Revolution. It came after the government committed to shutter its last coal-fueled plant by 2025. While there's plenty of work still to be done, it's a major achievement for a country whose capital is nicknamed "The Big Smoke".
Sweden gets points for relatively low carbon emissions and a highly efficient recycling system—in fact, Sweden is so good at recycling it has to import garbage to keep the recycling plants going. While time will tell if the Scandinavian country can continue to put its money where its mouth is, the report applauds the country's goal of shifting to 100 percent renewable energy by 2040. Turns out, work-life balance isn't the only thing the Swedes do better than we do.
France takes the highest possible spot in the rankings, in large part due to the leadership role it took in coordinating the Paris climate accord. Its continued commitment to the goals outlined in the agreement was on display in the hours following the U.S.'s decision to pull out of the agreement when in a now-viral video, newly elected Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron invited U.S. climate scientists to France before ending his address with the words "Make our planet great again." Touché.
https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/countries-doing-the-most-to-fight-climate-change
gunthernehmen
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Posts
- 2,907
In my view, when "experts" advise for a fee on matters that don't really require an experts advice, that's taking advantage of / swindling the victim. Although it's voluntary so none of our business.
When that advice is coerced by law or PR campaigns, it's predatory.
None of this says we shouldn't have taken appropriate measures to deal with Y2K (which was real, just overblown). Or deal with the intertwined energy and pollution issues we face now. Or the issues with corruption in our government (not just at the top but all the way down to your local patrol officer). We just disagree on some of the particulars and the approach to fix them.
I'm of the opinion a lot of this can't be fixed and will eventually lead to a collapse of some scale. Something will eventually give. What or on what scale, I have no idea.
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
When American climate alarmists claim to have witnessed the effects of global warming, they must be referring to a time beyond 14 years ago. That is because there has been no warming in the United States since at least 2005, according to updated data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
In January 2005, NOAA began recording temperatures at its newly built U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN). USCRN includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states. NOAA selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings.
Prior to the USCRN going online, alarmists and skeptics sparred over the accuracy of reported temperature data. With most preexisting temperature stations located in or near urban settings that are subject to false temperature signals and create their own microclimates that change over time, government officials performed many often-controversial adjustments to the raw temperature data. Skeptics of an asserted climate crisis pointed out that most of the reported warming in the United States was non-existent in the raw temperature data, but was added to the record by government officials.
The USCRN has eliminated the need to rely on, and adjust the data from, outdated temperature stations.... USCRN temperature stations show no warming since 2005 when the network went online. If anything, U.S. temperatures are now slightly cooler than they were 14 years ago....
There is also good reason to believe U.S. temperatures have not warmed at all since the 1930s. Raw temperature readings at the preexisting stations indicate temperatures are the same now as 80 years ago. All of the asserted U.S. warming since 1930 is the product of the controversial adjustments made to the raw data....
The lack of warming in the United States during the past 14 years is not too different from satellite-measured global trends. Globally, satellite instruments report temperatures have risen merely 0.15 degrees Celsius since 2005, which is less than half the pace predicted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate models.
In January 2005, NOAA began recording temperatures at its newly built U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN). USCRN includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states. NOAA selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings.
Prior to the USCRN going online, alarmists and skeptics sparred over the accuracy of reported temperature data. With most preexisting temperature stations located in or near urban settings that are subject to false temperature signals and create their own microclimates that change over time, government officials performed many often-controversial adjustments to the raw temperature data. Skeptics of an asserted climate crisis pointed out that most of the reported warming in the United States was non-existent in the raw temperature data, but was added to the record by government officials.
The USCRN has eliminated the need to rely on, and adjust the data from, outdated temperature stations.... USCRN temperature stations show no warming since 2005 when the network went online. If anything, U.S. temperatures are now slightly cooler than they were 14 years ago....
There is also good reason to believe U.S. temperatures have not warmed at all since the 1930s. Raw temperature readings at the preexisting stations indicate temperatures are the same now as 80 years ago. All of the asserted U.S. warming since 1930 is the product of the controversial adjustments made to the raw data....
The lack of warming in the United States during the past 14 years is not too different from satellite-measured global trends. Globally, satellite instruments report temperatures have risen merely 0.15 degrees Celsius since 2005, which is less than half the pace predicted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate models.
J. Taylor, Climate Alarmists Foiled: No U.S. Warming Since 2005, Real Clear Energy (Aug 23, 2019).
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Really racist dawn? Still more impossibly biased sources? The Heartland Institute, gee, I wonder who funds them? Philip Morris, Koch brothers, the usual crew.
The actual chart from NOAA clearly shows temperatures rising. I'm shocked your buddy there didn't lie and say "No warming since 1998!". There's plenty of evidence that the temperature in the US has been rising since 1986.
Come on racist dawn you were away for MONTHS and the best you could come up with was this? Terrible.
The actual chart from NOAA clearly shows temperatures rising. I'm shocked your buddy there didn't lie and say "No warming since 1998!". There's plenty of evidence that the temperature in the US has been rising since 1986.
Come on racist dawn you were away for MONTHS and the best you could come up with was this? Terrible.
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
Study the article. It indicates that poorly placed instruments requiring faulty analytical algorithms led to false positives in the USA. This implies that the same problem exists worldwide, so that properly placed instruments would lead to similar results elsewhere.
As usual, when faced with facts you don't like, you resort to the ad hominem fallacy. I agree the article is written in an unnecessarily partisan way. Ignore all that and look at the raw data. It comes from NOAA.
As usual, when faced with facts you don't like, you cite outdated and immaterial sources. The graph you point to is from August 2016. This is exactly the faulty data NOAA intentionally superseded with the new USCRN data described in the article. As you often do, by your clumsy attempts to dispute my facts, you have actually emphasized their relevance.
Aw, dan_c00000.... You missed me! How sweet.
It is primarily due to its militarily strategic geopolitical value, but you raise a good point.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
False positives? What’s that supposed to mean?Study the article. It indicates that poorly placed instruments requiring faulty analytical algorithms led to false positives in the USA. This implies that the same problem exists worldwide, so that properly placed instruments would lead to similar results elsewhere.
As usual, when faced with facts you don't like, you resort to the ad hominem fallacy. I agree the article is written in an unnecessarily partisan way. Ignore all that and look at the raw data. It comes from NOAA.
As usual, when faced with facts you don't like, you cite outdated and immaterial sources. The graph you point to is from August 2016. This is exactly the faulty data NOAA intentionally superseded with the new USCRN data described in the article. As you often do, by your clumsy attempts to dispute my facts, you have actually emphasized their relevance.
Aw, dan_c00000.... You missed me! How sweet.
It is primarily due to its militarily strategic geopolitical value, but you raise a good point.
You seem to think some new data is sufficient to prove global warming isn’t happening, despite all the record-setting heat waves, loss of glacial ice, and shifts in agricultural seasons. But all you offer is that it infers the rest of the world is equally wrong. What makes you think the difference is sufficient for your claim?
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Were they poorly placed in 1986? 1987? Because what the real non-doctored NOAA chart says is that temperatures have been rising since 1986 not "14 years ago" as your racist bullshit science dude says.
Sorry racist dawn but you just get absolutely destroyed by your own article.
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
It was NOAA itself that considered the older system to be poorly placed and subject to faulty data.
That's exactly why they created USCRN.
No, I'm not saying global warming hasn't happened. I'm saying that the data indicates that the environmental fixes we have had in place for the past couple of decades are working. That's what the data indicates. Why do you ignore the science?
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Fuck you're about to get owned really, really hard by your own article because it's right in the title "No U.S. Warming Since 2005".
So let's see: you posted an article you don't agree with, that's full of bullshit and lies, that got owned so hard they gave up on doing what it is they were founded for, and, finally lied about other things just for fun.
No dawn, you don't agree with them at all. Poor bot you might just want to shut down this alt again for another few months. It's getting embarrassing.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
It’s clear that you think the data indicates that. But where’s the science to support your conclusion?
My I
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2005
- Posts
- 1,245
It's because the Dems can't shut their mouths. #1 source of CO2 emissions: EXHALING.
So if the Dems are so concerned over global warming, why aren't they holding their breath?
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
Your question doesn't make sense. The science comes from NOAA which reports no climatic warming in the USA since at least 2005.
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2015
- Posts
- 3,120
Exactly my point.
The NOAA USCRN data shows that since these graphs were created, things have actually cooled slightly.
Thanks for the support!
Similar threads
