Trump - Off to Destroy the World

[Marcellus Falcon]

The 'world' doesnt actually need humans : we rather need the world.

I so agree. The world doesn't need saving or needs us.

[Marcellus Falcon]

And one last gem for those of you who claim "Trump-off to destroy the world"


http://www.businessinsider.com/us-2015-renewable-energy-investments-2016-5

The US spends the second most in the development of renewable energy of any nation in the world. This includes development by private companies and government agencies. All the Paris agreement did was require the US to basically triple its' investment amount, not to the benefit of the US, but to the benefit of other countries who don't spend anything, without actually requiring those other countries to meet the same standards as the US.

Basically the UN needed a checking account to fund their agenda and they once again turned to the US. We are 20 trillion in debt. the checkbook balance is in the red. Like Trump or not, this was a very bad deal and does next to nothing to address climate change.


Answer to question posed above, the #1 greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vaporwhich is 85-90 of greenhouse gas volume. 8-9% is CO2 and of that 8-9% only about 3% is man-made. which if you do the math. Overall man-made CO2 emmissions account for about 0.117% of total greenhouse gases.

I also have a great site to... um... site!
https://skepticalscience.com/empirical- ... -basic.htm

Here is the math i spoke of earlier.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

Yes this could go on forever.

Cheers for the data. I really love reading into both sides and data in general. I get inner conflicts sometimes but I think it makes me understand more people and how we are.

[Meliva]

I'm just having a hard time understanding why so many people think all you have to do is throw money at some scientists and then voila we have a solution..

I don't think just throwing money will solve anything, but proper funding given to the right people helps. It can be given to builders to construct things such as solar panels and wind turbines, or researchers to try to come up with more efficient methods. I certainly think a lot of the money spent on the US military budget could do a lot more good in other places, such as the medical fields, renewable energy, or NASA. Like I said before, even if you cut the military budget in half we would still be #1 in spending in military. That money could be so much more useful in other fields.

[Mack]

I do agree that we definitely overspend in the military sector, and we could put that money to use on our infrastructure.. but I still disagree with the solar plants and wind turbines being high priority.. there is so much natural gas out there that we just burn it off because we can't store it all I would say let's use that

[sXs]

I'm just having a hard time understanding why so many people think all you have to do is throw money at some scientists and then voila we have a solution..

I don't think just throwing money will solve anything, but proper funding given to the right people helps. It can be given to builders to construct things such as solar panels and wind turbines, or researchers to try to come up with more efficient methods. I certainly think a lot of the money spent on the US military budget could do a lot more good in other places, such as the medical fields, renewable energy, or NASA. Like I said before, even if you cut the military budget in half we would still be #1 in spending in military. That money could be so much more useful in other fields.

See my above posts. Solar panel and wind turbines are a waste. Solar power plants are only slightly better than clean coal fired power plants as far as pollutants and total footprint. The manufacture of solar panels is not a "green" process at all and the do not even have a break even point in either cost or total environmental impact. Solar power with current technology is a mythical version of renewable energy. Look into the manufacture process for solar panel, the overall footprint as far as physical real estate required to generate the power needed, and the life cycle of solar panels. No one considers the manufacture process of solar panels and the environmental impact of that.

To demonstrate another example of this.

The car that was deemed the worst car as far as negative overall environmental impact was the Nissan Leaf. It had nothing to do with the fuel it burned or the total mileage rates it achieved. It was the manufacturing process that was deemed the most destructive.

Yes solar power is "renewable" , but only if the equipment needed to generate that power is renewable. Solar panels have a life cycle of 15-20 with peak efficiency in the first 3-5 years. There is a steady drop off after that.

[sXs]

I do agree that we definitely overspend in the military sector, and we could put that money to use on our infrastructure.. but I still disagree with the solar plants and wind turbines being high priority.. there is so much natural gas out there that we just burn it off because we can't store it all I would say let's use that

Drive down I20 in the Permian Basin in west Texas at night and you can see the "flares" all across the oil fields.

[Maha]

in Europe it's possible to live well in houses that are not connected to electricity or gas (for heating and stoves) they are able to be energy neutral.
it is still expensive to do so, but it already gets cheaper.

all thanks to innovation sponsored by governments, big compagnies and foundations. money will go where the heart is. in my youth i could not swim in open water, too polluted. now it is possible again. an 2 hour outing in town would block my nose with black stuff. no longer.
the report of Rome was shocking and later mocked, but it changed our mindsets. today's awareness on climate change has hopefully a similar effect. i like a clean healthy and safe environment. i am willing to pay for that.

[Most Lee Harmless]

The first PC's cost $2000: now we have more powerful processing power, color screens, still and video camera, GPS-linked satellite maps, a library of music, of books, movies, TV shows and access to more information than we can ever use : in our phones for a few hundred dollars.

New technologies always cost a lot to implement then develop : the other side is legacy technology always seems cheaper, because we have paid off those development costs long long ago. I grew up before Clean Air Acts, and I well recall smog blanketing my home town, coughing and spluttering on my way to school. And the same argument came forth : electric heating was way more expensive than coal, that clean air was not economically viable, it was burdening business and the public with excessive costs for little gain.

We can use the economic argument for lots of things : why vaccinate every school child against measles, smallpox, etc.. its cheaper to just bury the ones who dont make it. Anyone recall which major car manufacturer left a fatal flaw un-remedied because it was cheaper to be sued and pay the legal costs when it went wrong than to fix all those cars?

If we can make a moral case to justify spending over a billion dollars a day to 'liberate' Afghanistan and Iraq.. I do think trying to keep a world worth living in, as opposed to us all just surviving in a radically changed environment, is worth considering.

[Mack]

We can use the economic argument for lots of things : why vaccinate every school child against measles, smallpox, etc.. its cheaper to just bury the ones who dont make it. Anyone recall which major car manufacturer left a fatal flaw un-remedied because it was cheaper to be sued and pay the legal costs when it went wrong than to fix all those cars?

If we can make a moral case to justify spending over a billion dollars a day to 'liberate' Afghanistan and Iraq.. I do think trying to keep a world worth living in, as opposed to us all just surviving in a radically changed environment, is worth considering.

Thats kind of out on a limb there with examples. Hey we definitely overspend in the military sector. I mean exactly what did they do with all of that money I mean I have not seen drastic climate change in my entire life I'm 32 years old so in my opinion if it's a hundred billion dollars a year thats 3.2 trillion dollars on what cleaner Cole you've got to be kidding me.


Just a reminder that this topic was about Trump leaving the Paris climate Accord

[Marcellus Falcon]

I have a little suggestion: Let's leave RL politics out of PG for now. We've all made our point here. Let's get back to just playing and politics inside PG and move on.

This could go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on aaaand on...