Support NeoGAF

[2MF]

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-china-agree-ratify-paris-climate-change-deal

Excerpt:

The United States and China, the world’s biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, have announced they will formally ratify the Paris climate change agreement in a move campaigners immediately hailed as a significant advance in the battle against global warming.

Speaking on Saturday, on the eve of the G20 summit in Hangzhou, US president, Barack Obama, confirmed the long-awaited move, the result of weeks of intense negotiations by Chinese and American officials.

“Just as I believe the Paris agreement will ultimately prove to be a turning point for our planet, I believe that history will judge today’s efforts as pivotal,” said Obama, who was speaking in the presence of the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, and United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon.

On the eve of the G20 summit in China, world leaders prepare to discuss climate change, Hinkley Point and the war in Syria

“Where there is a will and there is a vision and where countries like China and the United States are prepared to show leadership and to lead by example, it is possible for us to create a world that is more secure, more prosperous and more free than the one that was left for us,” added Obama, for whom the commitment is part of a final push to secure a green legacy for his presidency.

Earlier China had announced it would formally ratify the Paris accord with President Xi vowing to “unwaveringly pursue sustainable development”.

“Our response to climate change bears on the future of our people and the well-being of mankind,” Xi said, according to the Associated Press.

 

[Subpar Scrub]

Awesome stuff.

 

[RumblingRosco]

Let's hope they follow through with it. It still isn't enough, but is better than nothing.

 

[Hyun Sai]

I still think my island will be underwater in less than 100 years, but that's a start I guess...

 

[Surface of Me]

I read the excerpt in OP and dont know what is changing about the Paris agreement

 

[2MF]

I read the excerpt in OP and dont know what is changing about the Paris agreement

USA and China approved it. Together they represent 38% of the world's carbon emissions.

 

[PdotMichael]

Well, the USA has an easy job.

CO2 output per capita is so insanely large that if they halve it and they would just meet the European level.

 

[2MF]

Well, the USA has an easy job.

CO2 output per capita is so insanely large that they halve it and they would just meet the European level.

Yeah:

 

[E-phonk]

I read the excerpt in OP and dont know what is changing about the Paris agreement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement

 

[EmiPrime]

People will still be eating meat, dairy and eggs at ever increasing volumes and any change in emissions won't be enough, the world will get warmer.

 

[BAW]

Planet saved!

 

[RumblingRosco]

People will still be eating meat, dairy and eggs at ever increasing volumes and any change in emissions won't be enough, the world will get warmer.

This is very true. A primarily vegetarian or vegan diet is the way to go to really cut into carbon emissions.

 

[Koodo]

To my understanding, China has already been making great strides in renewable energy and reducing emissions. Wouldn't be surprised if they meet or exceed the goals in the deal.

The USA though... well, words are easier than actions.

 

[IISANDERII]

Great news. Canada though, thanks Harper?

 

[The Technomancer]

To my understanding, China has already been making great strides in renewable energy and reducing emissions. Wouldn't be surprised if they meet or exceed the goals in the deal.

The USA though... well, words are easier than actions.

Sadly I need to see the receipts. I honestly don't know if I more believe that China actually is aware of the greater issues and really is rolling out huge programs, or if they're doctoring the books to look good

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

This is very true. A primarily vegetarian or vegan diet is the way to go to really cut into carbon emissions.

no it isn't, reducing industry, electric,transportation emissions would be far, far more productive than simply having people be forced into a vegetarian diet.

The amount of emissions from non-land use totals far greater than land use. Doesn't mean that reducing land use and meat consumption isn't going to be an important step, but the notion that changing the worlds diet is going to be THE fix is ignoring the main producers of emissions is just not accurate to the point I see a lot of people making.

Sadly I need to see the receipts. I honestly don't know if I more believe that China actually is aware of the greater issues and really is rolling out huge programs, or if they're doctoring the books to look good

China Curbs Plans for More Coal-Fired Power Plants

Statistics From China Say Coal Consumption Continues to Drop

China’s Carbon Emissions May Have Peaked, but It’s Hazy


China isn't stupid, there are many factors driving their shift and use of emissions. It's not just to reduce carbon emissions, it's about air quality, economic shifts, water use and so on.

The years of China growing at the breakneck pace of 10% GDP are over, and that was the main cause of our rapid emissions growth of the last decade.

Based on the goals of China laid out they will surpass their targets, but everyone already knew that when they announced them, the real interesting part is how much they beat it by.

 

[Nere]

People will still be eating meat, dairy and eggs at ever increasing volumes and any change in emissions won't be enough, the world will get warmer.

You really think the diet of people hurts the enviroment more than factories, cars etc. Seriously?

 

[Lexxism]

Yeah

Holy shit at Canada.

 

[PdotMichael]

Sadly I need to see the receipts. I honestly don't know if I more believe that China actually is aware of the greater issues and really is rolling out huge programs, or if they're doctoring the books to look good

What do you not believe that China has not even 1/2 of the co2 per capita output of the USA?
Or that China is already the largest investor of renewable energy?
Or that China's CO2 output is already shrinking?

 

[jett]

It will come to nothing most likely, sadly.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

It will come to nothing.

jett
D(eep)-Member
(Today, 11:21 AM)

 

[4Tran]

The bigger question is whether Paris gets ratified by Congress, and the US actually does anything to curb emissions. To this date, one of the two major parties has, as it's party platform, insistence that coal is a clean source of power. As long as these people hold any power, it's hard to see any progress made. The Chinese side shouldn't be a problem since they've already been tackling their emissions on the federal level.

Sadly I need to see the receipts. I honestly don't know if I more believe that China actually is aware of the greater issues and really is rolling out huge programs, or if they're doctoring the books to look good

The main reason China is big on green energies isn't because of some sort of global goodwill; it's because pollution has been causing huge problems to themselves. That's why the vast majority of things like solar panels are made in China nowadays and why they're shelving coal plants for nuclear ones.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

The bigger question is whether Paris gets ratified by Congress, and the US actually does anything to curb emissions. To this date, one of the two major parties has, as it's party platform, insistence that coal is a clean source of power. As long as these people hold any power, it's hard to see any progress made. The Chinese side shouldn't be a problem since they've already been tackling their emissions on the federal level.


The main reason China is big on green energies isn't because of some sort of global goodwill; it's because pollution has been causing huge problems to themselves. That's why the vast majority of things like solar panels are made in China nowadays and why they're shelving coal plants for nuclear ones.

It doesn't need to be ratified by Congress, and the laws are already on the books (Carbon emissions are deemed an air pollutant by SCOTUS) and can be regulated by the EPA.

5% of greenhouse emissions come from agriculture and livestock. So you are saying doing something about 95% of greenhouse emissions would do nothing because of 5%?

No, it's more around 15/20% (meat consumption is bundled in with all land use emissions, the actual numbers of pure meat diets isn't really concrete iirc)

 

[AlStrong]

Great news. Canada though, thanks Harper?

hm....

 

[CrazyDude]

People will still be eating meat, dairy and eggs at ever increasing volumes and any change in emissions won't be enough, the world will get warmer.

5% of greenhouse emissions come from agriculture and livestock. So you are saying doing something about 95% of greenhouse emissions would do nothing because of 5%?

 

[Shiggy]

Yeah:

Why is Indonesia that high? Because they are burning their forests?

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Why is Indonesia that high? Because they are burning their forests?

yes

 

[AxelFoley]

How do you say "Thanks, Obama" in Mandarin?

 

[2MF]

Holy shit at Canada.

I haven't researched why they're so high, my first guess is oil sands production?

 

[4Tran]

It doesn't need to be ratified by Congress, and the laws are already on the books (Carbon emissions are deemed an air pollutant by SCOTUS) and can be regulated by the EPA.

That's good news, let's hope that something fruitful can come out of it. Republican opposition is still a big sticking point though.

I haven't researched why they're so high, my first guess is oil sands production?

That, and long winters, and lots of coal plants.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Holy shit at Canada.

Those oilsands are adding up there.

 

[frontovik]

I'll believe it when I see results.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

How do you say "Thanks, Obama" in Mandarin?

远离我们的岛屿离

 

[Kinitari]

In Canada, we're right now dealing with our Federal government trying to negotiate carbon taxes and whatnot with each individual province - however certain provinces are not thrilled with it. Saskatchewan I think was one of the bigger problems - I can't remember why.

Basically, I know our Federal government is in the process of ratifying the Paris deal, they just committed to getting each province on board first, so it's taking a while.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

I haven't researched why they're so high, my first guess is oil sands production?

A good chunk of it, yes. The other provinces are still mostly above Europe though.

Tar sands are in Alberta (and Saskatchewan to a lesser extent).

http://canada2020.ca/canada-carbon-tax/

 

[CrazyDude]

No, it's more around 15/20% (meat consumption is bundled in with all land use emissions, the actual numbers of pure meat diets isn't really concrete iirc)

6% of greenhouse is caused by Nitrous Oxide. Of that 6%, 4% is caused by live stock.
11% of greenhouse is caused by methane. Of that 11%, 30% is caused by livestock.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#methane
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#methane

Correct me if I am wrong. Just so I understand this stuff better.

 

[AxelFoley]

远离我们的岛屿离

Well done.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

6% of greenhouse is caused by Nitrous Oxide. Of that 6%, 4% is caused by live stock.
11% of greenhouse is caused by methane. Of that 11%, 30% is caused by livestock.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#methane
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#methane

Correct me if I am wrong. Just so I understand this stuff better.

We're talking global emissions, not simply US emissions.

 

[vpance]

People will still be eating meat, dairy and eggs at ever increasing volumes and any change in emissions won't be enough, the world will get warmer.

Cowspiracy right?

 

[KimiNewt]

This is very true. A primarily vegetarian or vegan diet is the way to go to really cut into carbon emissions.

You serious? According to the EPA website, Agriculture is responsible for 9% of emissions and that includes farming aside from farm animals as well. Within farm animals the majority of emissions is by cows.

Reduction in meat consumption would lower emissions but you're being disingenuous if you're suggesting the best way to go about reducing emissions is to stop eating animal products-- which will probably a bigger step in one's life than the more effective ways to do so (or maybe just reducing cow-products intake).

 

[sasliquid]

While it's definitely a step forward the INDCs put forward by Paris aren't enough to avoid dangerous climate change, we can always aim to do better and keep shit in the ground.