No matter who wins, the US exits the Paris climate accord the day after the election

Posted: October 29, 2020 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Emissions, net zero, Politics
Tags:


Pro-alarmist journals (see below) hate this of course, but hope to get their desired but unworkable climate agenda back on course shortly afterwards. Standby for another volley of ‘climate experts say’ — their assertions have a tendency to prove false when tested by reality.
– – –
If victorious, Democrat Joe Biden has promised to swiftly rejoin, says Inside Climate News.

But the process would be tricky, like jumping on a moving train.

Regardless of the outcome of the presidential election, the United States will officially be out of the 2015 Paris climate agreement on Nov. 4, marking a disappointing milestone in the international effort to stop global warming.

Climate experts say that, if the world’s biggest historic greenhouse gas polluter won’t slash emissions, there’s little hope of meeting the Paris target of averting catastrophic global warming.

But the U.S. could rejoin the global climate pact quickly, and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has said he would do that early in his presidency.

After sending a letter to the United Nations Secretary General, the United States would once again become a party to the Paris Agreement 30 days later, said Michael Burger, executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.

Around the same time, the U.S. would also need to submit a new national emissions reduction pledge, he added.

Continued here.

Comments
  1. ivan says:

    There is a simple answer to all this stupidity – disband the UN and all its offshoots! That would remove the burden that is being put on all tax-payers of the world to support an organisation that is well past its sell by date.

  2. oldbrew says:

    Why carbophobia is pointless…

    Study suggests no more CO2 warming
    By David Wojick | October 26th, 2020

    Precision research by physicists William Happer and William van Wijngaarden has determined that the present levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide and water vapor are almost completely saturated. In radiation physics the technical term “saturated” implies that adding more molecules will not cause more warming.

    In plain language this means that from now on our emissions from burning fossil fuels could have little or no further impact on global warming. There would be no climate emergency. No threat at all. We could emit as much CO2 as we like; with no effect.

    This astounding finding resolves a huge uncertainty that has plagued climate science for over a century. How should saturation be measured and what is its extent with regard to the primary greenhouse gases? [bold added]

    https://www.cfact.org/2020/10/26/study-suggests-no-more-co2-warming/
    – – –
    Backs up Angstrom’s 1900 findings.
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2020/10/16/pick-your-a-team-arrhenius-or-angstrom/
    = = =
    Another point: where is the evidence that CO2 increases cause water vapour increases? Don’t say ‘climate models’ 🙄

  3. cognog2 says:

    The evidence that CO2 increases do NOT increase water vapour is demonstrated daily in our steam generating plants where increases in energy input results in an increase in the RATE of circulation of the Cycle but NOT the MASS being circulated.
    The data also shows that there has been little change in humidity levels in spite of CO2 increases.

  4. oldbrew says:

    To prioritize global climate policies, Biden should organize the White House and other relevant agencies “in ways that embed climate considerations in U.S. foreign policy and national security,” Susan Biniaz, a former top climate negotiator for the U.S., wrote in a blog post for the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law where she is a non-resident senior fellow.

    The what? 😖

  5. oldbrew says:

    Economic growth is bad for the climate, Europe’s Science Academies claim
    Date: 30/10/20 GWPF & The Daily Telegraph

    The capture of Europe’s scientific institutions and organisations by degrowth ideologues is a tragic reflection on the state of green ideology which is bringing institutional science ever more into disrepute.

    https://www.thegwpf.com/socialist-science-economic-growth-is-bad-for-the-climate-europes-science-academies-claim/
    – – –
    Communism’s degrowth didn’t work out too well 🙄

  6. oldbrew says:

    US formally exits Paris climate agreement as election hangs in balance
    Date: 04/11/20 Reuters

    Trump first announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the pact in June 2017, arguing it would undermine the U.S. economy. But he was unable to formally do so until now because of the requirements of the deal.

    https://www.thegwpf.com/us-formally-quits-paris-climate-agreement-as-election-hangs-in-balance/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s