Trump Expected to Pull Out of Paris Climate Agreement

How is anyone still alive this long after the US pulled out of this agreement? I was told the world would be doomed and we were all going to die now....is that not the case?

 

Citing InfoWars... WTF?

 

In Europe politicians have to talk like this on climate related topics, since the populace is so passionate about the topic (not as much the case in the US). Let's see how the European countries' actual actions towards the US change. My guess is they won't be too different.

 

It took several years to hash out the deal, a non binding one at that, if it takes several more years for trump to agree to another one, that's effectively the same as sacking the deal.

 

What's a few years in the history of earth?

 

Then it wasn't a deal worth having. I mean, as it stands, it was a non binding deal that would allow the world's top emitter of CO2 to continue increasing their emissions of CO2 till 2030....and that's just if they happened to decide to abide by the deal and not continue increasing it after that fact. It's a deal that would allow the world's 3rd most emitter of CO2 to increase their emissions till they were 2nd most on the list.....and that's just if they planned on meeting goals that there have been articles saying that it would be impossible for them to meet given that they are planning on building hundreds of new coal plants.....and they are requiring that they be paid to be part of the agreement in increased foreign aid.

Point is, if you really care about CO2 emissions, then this deal was garbage from the beginning because the only country that matters who is likely to abide by the deal (with or without agreement) is the US and because of the increases in emissions elsewhere, it's unlikely to make any difference whatsoever. It's just an excuse for countries that don't like the US and US citizens that don't like the president to act like petulant children and not much more.

 

Getting a binding international deal without the US agreeing to reduce their emissions further is more difficult than the existing one trump walked away from. Before Paris, there was Bali, Doha, Copenhagen, and other failures I've forgotten.

They likely had Kyoto in mind with the welshers, cheaters, and onlookers to bring a more inclusive agreement.

How many times do we have to hear Trump b**** about he didn't expect how hard it complex something was right after he broke it in the name of fixing it?

 

The Paris deal was a horrible and unenforceable deal so I don't worry too much about "breaking it", whatever you mean by that.

 

Deflect deflect deflect. Does that give Trump time come up with a new plan since he obviously didn't understand the Paris Agreement and didn't listen to Rick Perry or Tillerson?

You rubes support an amateur who doesn't even understand the things he tries to "negotiate".

 

As it was, there wasn't a pressing reason to walk away from it other than to piss people off.

Renegotiate, do nothing or do both was all possible while staying in the accords and it's harder to say we'd have more leverage now that he pissed off the parties he has to negotiate with. That's assuming he's honest or genuine in restructuring a new deal to a problem he hasn't backed away from calling a hoax.

 

It's not actually. You are just very ignorant about the world and like Trump, very ignorant of the agreement.

Trump could have taken this agreement and turn into a major positive by using America's vast supply of natural gas, which is relatively clean burning, as an export to China, the EU, SE Asia, and the developed Asian countries. It's amazing how ignorant people are when they lack any vision and instead hide behind partisanship.

 

This. The rubes just don't understand the structure of the agreement.

 

That is the funny thing about this, isn't it?

A shrewder conservative like Romney would have played this as reaching across the aisles, and it would have looked good on the resume come 2020 to independent and swing voters.

Trump just looks foolish here. Even if it's just to please his followers, he could have easily excused that away and they would have eaten it up as they do for anything he craps out.

 

Right, that's POTUS. Tight with InfoWars and Alex Jones. Trump called him up after winning thanking him for his contribution and saying Jones has an amazing reputation. That's the kind of people Trump is honored to be associated with. The people that think Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax. disgusting!

 

While many think that Trump is doing this to the left. I think he's a true believer and denier. He's wacko. Or, maybe he's not that wacko, but he is seeking extra love and praise by his followers. That sure would make him happy. Fanatic response is what drive him high and he's an addict.

 

Or more likely, the Paris Agreement will be used to stymie through the court system the development of the natural gas resources, the pipelines and LNG ports that would be needed to support these exports.I'd expect Paris to be used to fight every single energy project going forward.

Much like Canada, where endless wrangling over pipelines has meant that Canada has already lost out on the LNG sweepstakes to other countries and still hasn't built any new major pipelines to move the extra supply from the oil sands. And even for a pipeline twinning project that's Federally approved and where the Albertan government has implemented a carbon tax to obtain social license, the newly formed coalition government in BC where the pipeline terminates promises to fight it tooth and nail.

 

He's not a true believer, he just goes by whatever the last good idea said was. In this case, he had Pruitt whispering in his ear, not Rex Tillerson or Rick Perry. Both of the latter understood the actual agreement and told Trump to stay in.

 

Actually you're the "rube" here.

The Paris agreement was by all accounts a tiny, tiny step. It's voluntary and unenforced. That's laughable. The only reason China and India are interested in this is because they need to reduce pollution in their cities for health benefits anyways - in case you didn't know - CO2 is not pollution, as it's colorless and odorless.

The only "stick" the agreement has is simply geopolitical peer pressure, which is exactly the lever they're pulling hard on right now.

 

Well, the reason China and India signed on is because they don't really have to do anything different while India gets increased foreign aid and they both get PR for "doing their part" while building hundreds of new coal burning plants.

 

I doubt it as the infrastructure goes mostly through conservative states, except the gas play in the NE USA. It's already caught up to coal for market share in the US in a few short years.

The problem with natural gas is that the industry is stubborn and does itself no favors by taking such a "fossil fuel" stance on the environment instead of playing to its strengths of being low emission and a great base load energy.

Canada doesn't have as cheap natural gas either, but the US already has a few LNG export terminals under construction in the gulf where the infrastructure is already mostly built. I would foresee opposition, but LNG needs to do a better job at marketing itself as a replacement for coal.