How Do We Deal With Overpopulation, While Respecting Human Rights?

[Bonam]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

In part, yes.  The U.S. economy influences international policy.  It can be used for good or evil.  Progress or regression.  Not supporting a major climate change agreement with everything we know about the impact of greenhouse gasses is reckless in the extreme, darn right inimical.

US greenhouse gas emissions peaked in 2007 and have been declining since, and are projected to continue to decline gradually over the coming years, even with the relatively "anti-environment" policies of the current administration. Yes, with more effort they could be made to decline a bit faster. 

On the other hand, China, India, and SE Asia are increasing emissions at a rate that far outpaces any impact that could possibly be made in the developed world. Every 10 years, the CO2 output of Asia increases by an amount equal to the entire current emissions of the US. Whether the US cuts emissions by 5% or 8% over the next decade makes virtually no impact when China and India will be emitting an entire extra America's worth of emissions by then. 

This is where the "environmental justice" people totally ignore reality. They talk about "historical emissions", etc. But what's been done in the past cannot be changed, all that can be affected is the future. And there is no way to significantly impact total world CO2 output without focusing almost exclusively on China, India, and SE Asia, which together are responsible for over 90% of all the growth in emissions, while the Western world is already gradually reducing its output. You just can't argue with the math. The US and Europe could cut their output to 0 and we would still shoot right past the 2C target all the way to >4C, without even missing a beat. 

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, Bonam said:

1.US greenhouse gas emissions peaked in 2007 and have been declining since, and are projected to continue to decline gradually over the coming years, even with the relatively "anti-environment" policies of the current administration. Yes, with more effort they could be made to decline a bit faster. 

2. On the other hand, China, India, and SE Asia are increasing emissions at a rate that far outpaces any impact that could possibly be made in the developed world.  

3. This is where the "environmental justice" people totally ignore reality. They talk about "historical emissions", etc. But what's been done in the past cannot be changed, all that can be affected is the future. And there is no way to significantly impact total world CO2 output without focusing almost exclusively on China, India, and SE Asia, which together are responsible for over 90% of all the growth in emissions, while the Western world is already gradually reducing its output. You just can't argue with the math. The US and Europe could cut their output to 0 and we would still shoot right past the 2C target all the way to >4C, without even missing a beat. 

1. & 2. That sounds good and even global production may be levelling.  Googled, and the graph below seems to show it starting to level at 2014 and the 2nd link bears it out also.  

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions

3.  Not everyone who is discussing Climate Change is reasonable.  I think that all nations have now signed on to the Paris accord.  I understand China is moving towards renewables more, which may be helping.

 

[Guest]

I'm going to try and make this my next read...

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/william-vollmann-carbon-ideologies/568309/

[taxme]

14 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

In part, yes.  The U.S. economy influences international policy.  It can be used for good or evil.  Progress or regression.  Not supporting a major climate change agreement with everything we know about the impact of greenhouse gasses is reckless in the extreme, darn right inimical.

If I were you I would be writing letters to the governments of India and China or have you done so already? No one from the global climate people seem to want to go after China or India as much as they want to blame and go after North Americans. Instead they want North Americans to cut back. What silly bs nonsense. North Americans are doing nothing harmful to global warming compared to how much India and China are doing to climate change today.     So, what are you doing today to try and stop global warming? Let's hear it. 

[Zeitgeist]

4 hours ago, taxme said:

If I were you I would be writing letters to the governments of India and China or have you done so already? No one from the global climate people seem to want to go after China or India as much as they want to blame and go after North Americans. Instead they want North Americans to cut back. What silly bs nonsense. North Americans are doing nothing harmful to global warming compared to how much India and China are doing to climate change today.     So, what are you doing today to try and stop global warming? Let's hear it. 

I put solar panels on my house (cost $33000.00 CAN) and I recycle/reuse everything I can.  I don't understand your argument.  Are you suggesting that by pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement the U.S. is going to be more persuasive in leading countries to cut emissions, especially large emitters like China?  The U.S. had a huge head start in industrial development over China and India, which are trying to reach the U.S.'s standard of development.  You want China and India to make sacrifices without having your benefits.  The current U.S. government wants to retain all the benefits of its high level of development without making any sacrifices.  Global warming has no borders and requires international measures.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I put solar panels on my house (cost $33000.00 CAN) and I recycle/reuse everything I can.  I don't understand your argument.  Are you suggesting that by pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement the U.S. is going to be more persuasive in leading countries to cut emissions, especially large emitters like China?  The U.S. had a huge head start in industrial development over China and India, which are trying to reach the U.S.'s standard of development.  You want China and India to make sacrifices without having your benefits.  The current U.S. government wants to retain all the benefits of its high level of development without making any sacrifices.  Global warming has no borders and requires international measures.

I think your last sentence refutes your earlier point.  If we want to stop global warming China and India (and other developing nations) have to make those sacrifices, regardless of benefits.  It can't be done fairly. 

I'm of the opinion they won't, and that's fair enough.  But we're all doomed if all we do is put solar panels on our roofs and recycle our cans and bottles. No offense meant. 

[Zeitgeist]

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I think your last sentence refutes your earlier point.  If we want to stop global warming China and India (and other developing nations) have to make those sacrifices, regardless of benefits.  It can't be done fairly. 

I'm of the opinion they won't, and that's fair enough.  But we're all doomed if all we do is put solar panels on our roofs and recycle our cans and bottles. No offense meant. 

My point is that governments have to set environmental policy.  Individuals can only do so much.  Solar panels are a small piece of the puzzle.  

Don’t forget that China and India are signatories of the Paris Agreement.  They are implementing national policies to curb emissions. The US federal government is scrapping such measures. 

[bush_cheney2004]

34 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Don’t forget that China and India are signatories of the Paris Agreement.  They are implementing national policies to curb emissions. The US federal government is scrapping such measures. 

 

The US has actually done far better than Canada, which failed badly on the Kyoto Treaty and continues to fail under the Paris Agreement.

 

 

http://canadianlabour.ca/news/news-archive/clc-report-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-canada

Edited September 15, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[Zeitgeist]

4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The US has actually done far better than Canada, which failed badly on the Kyoto Treaty and continues to fail under the Paris Agreement.

 

 

http://canadianlabour.ca/news/news-archive/clc-report-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-canada

At least our public policy is in the right direction.  I agree that it’s a problem.  Doug Ford isn’t helping, scrapping cap and trade in Ontario. 

[bush_cheney2004]

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

At least our public policy is in the right direction.  I agree that it’s a problem.  Doug Ford isn’t helping, scrapping cap and trade in Ontario. 

 

That is the problem....political appearances over substance.    The USA, having never ratified Kyoto and now leaving the Paris Agreement, has outperformed Canada on GHG emissions reduction rates.   

Edited September 15, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[Zeitgeist]

5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

That is the problem....political appearances over substance.    The USA, having never ratified Kyoto and now leaving the Paris Agreement, has outperformed Canada on GHG emissions growth rates.   

Well the oil sands are a political problem for Canada.  At first glance it’s a cash cow, but what about the impacts?  We can’t have it both ways. That’s why I hate seeing emissions reduction policy rolled back.  Trump is leading the way in the roll backs. 

Edited September 15, 2018 by Zeitgeist

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Well the oil sands are a political problem for Canada.  At first glance it’s a cash cow, but what about the impacts?  We can’t have it both ways. That’s why I hate seeing emissions reduction policy rolled back.  Trump is leading the way in the roll backs. 

 

More political posturing that reduces zero GHG emissions.   

The Americans have done better than Canada, and continue to do better than Canada....Trump or no Trump.

[Zeitgeist]

7 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

More political posturing that reduces zero GHG emissions.   

The Americans have done better than Canada, and continue to do better than Canada....Trump or no Trump.

Don't extrapolate that conclusion from that reference.  Canada is doing better socially and politically than the U.S. right now.  You will disagree because you seem to like big class distinctions and class warfare: Us versus them, rich versus poor, left versus right, instill fear, build a wall...

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Don't extrapolate that conclusion from that reference.  Canada is doing better socially and politically than the U.S. right now.  You will disagree because you seem to like big class distinctions and class warfare: Us versus them, rich versus poor, left versus right, instill fear, build a wall...

 

The facts of GHG emissions are what they are...and despite all the usual smug Canadian claims about being "better" on such things, Canada is being outperformed by the United States for the very things it says are so important.  

Facts don't matter to SJWs.....

[Zeitgeist]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The facts of GHG emissions are what they are...and despite all the usual smug Canadian claims about being "better" on such things, Canada is being outperformed by the United States for the very things it says are so important.  

Facts don't matter to SJWs.....

I don't know about SJWs, but the U.S.'s success on emissions are due to past federal and current states actions, not current federal government.  Stop deflecting.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don't know about SJWs, but the U.S.'s success on emissions are due to past federal and current states actions, not current federal government.  Stop deflecting.

 

Actually, it is from many other factors as well, but that is secondary.

The United States is outperforming Canada on GHG emissions reductions....why is it so hard to accept that ?

Trump government or not....what is Canada's problem ?

Politics vs. Reality.....

[Zeitgeist]

3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Actually, it is from many other factors as well, but that is secondary.

The United States is outperforming Canada on GHG emissions reductions....why is it so hard to accept that ?

Trump government or not....what is Canada's problem ?

Politics vs. Reality.....

You don't seem to understand that politics is about setting policy.  Your president's policies are undermining efforts to reduce climate change.  Don't tell me what some states or private companies are doing.  That's got nothing to do with Trump's public policy.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

You don't seem to understand that politics is about setting policy.  Your president's policies are undermining efforts to reduce climate change.  Don't tell me what some states or private companies are doing.  That's got nothing to do with Trump's public policy.

 

...and you appear to value perception over reality.    My country's presidents have done more to reduce "climate change" than any Canadian prime minister.

Why does Canada get a pass for failure ?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

My point is that governments have to set environmental policy.  Individuals can only do so much.  Solar panels are a small piece of the puzzle.  

Don’t forget that China and India are signatories of the Paris Agreement.  They are implementing national policies to curb emissions. The US federal government is scrapping such measures. 

Governments won't set environmental policies that will actually make a difference until everyone else's government sets the same.  That's going to require a cooperative level of sacrifice that is going to be impossible to achieve.  Head for the high ground.  Make sure the soil is good.

[Bonam]

4 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

My point is that governments have to set environmental policy.  Individuals can only do so much.  Solar panels are a small piece of the puzzle.  

Don’t forget that China and India are signatories of the Paris Agreement.  They are implementing national policies to curb emissions. The US federal government is scrapping such measures. 

They are implementing policies which involve projections of peaking 10-20 years from now, at levels much higher than today, before slowly starting to reduce emissions. That's not "curbing". If every country in the world follows the commitments that they made at the Paris agreement, the world would still blow right past the 2C targets all the way to 4C or more, primarily because these commitments allow China and India and SE Asia to massively increase emissions over the coming decades. 

The billions of people in China, India, and SE Asia will not be held back from attaining development and comforts comparable to Western nations, and the emissions they will generate to get there will far surpass what's been emitted so far. 

The most realistic way that warming that has been assessed as "catastrophic" can be avoided is through solar engineering approaches, like a sun shield. NASA studies suggest that a sun shield sufficient to partially counteract global warming could be built for just a few trillion dollars, a small price to pay if the consequences of global warming are as problematic as predicted. 

Once the impact of global warming becomes clear, and the political impetus to act becomes urgent, solar engineering will present by far the easiest options for meaningful action, especially since in a few decades time it may be quite realistic for an individual country, or even an individual corporation, to fund such projects, rather than attempting to reach global consensus on action which can be sabotaged by just one large economy that dissents. 

Edited September 15, 2018 by Bonam

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 The United States is outperforming Canada on GHG emissions reductions....why is it so hard to accept that ?

Because people cling to national identity above all other standards for objectivity, perspective and even ethics ?

Have you ever known anyone to do this ?  Have you ever purchased a mirror ?

[bush_cheney2004]

49 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Because people cling to national identity above all other standards for objectivity, perspective and even ethics ?

Have you ever known anyone to do this ?  Have you ever purchased a mirror ?

 

1)  Nope....this member has repeatedly rejected the evils of nationalism

2)  Noh, Canada....

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

1)  Nope....this member has repeatedly rejected the evils of nationalism

2)  Noh, Canada....

1) Cite

2) America produces the bestest mirrors....

[Zeitgeist]

14 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

...and you appear to value perception over reality.    My country's presidents have done more to reduce "climate change" than any Canadian prime minister.

Why does Canada get a pass for failure ?

Trudeau's policies push to reduce climate change.  Trump's policies reduce climate change counter-measures.  The work of past presidents is in the past.

Edited September 15, 2018 by Zeitgeist

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Trudeau's policies push to reduce climate change. 

Every little helps, said the monkey as he peed into the sea.