Biden, in a Burst of Climate Orders, Rejoins the Paris Agreement
The New York Times.
Jan 20 2020

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/20/climate/biden-paris-climate-agreement.html



President Biden signed an executive order on the Paris climate agreement in the Oval Office on Wednesday.   :)

WASHINGTON — President Joseph R. Biden Jr. on Wednesday recommitted the United States to the Paris climate agreement, the international accord designed to avert catastrophic global warming, and ordered federal agencies to start reviewing and reinstating more than 100 environmental regulations that were weakened or rolled back by former President Donald J. Trump.

The moves represent a first step in healing one of the deepest rifts between the United States and the rest of the world after Mr. Trump defiantly rejected the Paris pact and seemed to relish his administration’s push to weaken or undo major domestic climate policies.   :(

Mr. Biden has elevated tackling the climate crisis among his highest priorities. In addition to curbing global warming, he has vowed that ending the coronavirus pandemic, restoring the economy and addressing racial injustice will be the central causes of his administration.

“We’re going to combat climate change in a way we have not before,” Mr. Biden said in the Oval Office on Wednesday evening, just before signing the executive orders. Even so, he cautioned: “They are just executive actions. They are important but we’re going to need legislation for a lot of the things we’re going to do.”



Foreign leaders hailed Mr. Biden’s first moves as a powerful signal that the United States, the largest contributor to global warming in history, intends to restart its efforts to lower pollution levels and to restore the international order upended by Mr. Trump. “Welcome back to the Paris Agreement!” Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, said in a Twitter message.


Under the Paris Agreement, nearly 200 nations have vowed to reduce planet warming emissions to avert the most disastrous consequences of climate change. A letter to the United Nations signed by Mr. Biden on Wednesday formally starts the 30-day process of bringing the United States back into the accord.   :)

But analysts cautioned that Mr. Biden’s actions on day one must be quickly followed by a series of aggressive domestic climate policies to drastically lower the country’s emissions of planet-warming pollution from tailpipes, smokestacks and oil and gas wells.

Also on Wednesday, Mr. Biden rescinded the construction permit for the Keystone XL oil pipeline, which would have transported carbon-heavy oil from the Canadian oil sands to the Gulf Coast. Earlier in the day, TC Energy, a Canadian company, said that it was suspending work on the line.



But the lengthy legal process of undoing most of Mr. Trump’s environmental rollbacks and replacing them with new regulations could take many years and is likely to be strewn with political land mines if Republicans or business groups fight against them.

Hi Whiteknight -
will China and India also have the same expensive regulations
applied to their industries?

This is indeed good news.

Without some leadership from the US we would never get going on working as one planet to address planetary issues.

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 3:58pm:

This is indeed good news. Without some leadership from the US we would never get going on working as one planet to address planetary issues.

Will China and India also have the same expensive regulations
applied to their industries?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 4:09pm:

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 3:58pm: This is indeed good news. Without some leadership from the US we would never get going on working as one planet to address planetary issues. Will China and India also have the same expensive regulations applied to their industries?

No, but this is the stuff that needs to be sorted.

My point is, without the US in the club, it provides an excuse for other countries to not play properly. if all the super countries join and lead, there is a chance to influence all the other major polluters.

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 4:22pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:09pm: Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 3:58pm: This is indeed good news. Without some leadership from the US we would never get going on working as one planet to address planetary issues. Will China and India also have the same expensive regulations applied to their industries? No, but this is the stuff that needs to be sorted. My point is, without the US in the club, it provides an excuse for other countries to not play properly. if all the super countries join and lead, there is a chance to influence all the other major polluters.

You'd hope so but that hasn't worked so far.
The last graphs I saw somewhere showed
that China and India are polluting more than ever.
I think China builds a new coal fired power station every 2 weeks don't they?
( or is it every week?)

Bobby. wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 4:28pm:

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:22pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:09pm: Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 3:58pm: This is indeed good news. Without some leadership from the US we would never get going on working as one planet to address planetary issues. Will China and India also have the same expensive regulations applied to their industries? No, but this is the stuff that needs to be sorted. My point is, without the US in the club, it provides an excuse for other countries to not play properly. if all the super countries join and lead, there is a chance to influence all the other major polluters. You'd hope so but that hasn't worked so far. The last graphs I saw somewhere showed that China and India are polluting more than ever. I think China builds a new coal fired power station every 2 weeks don't they? ( or is it every week?)

Yes, so the best chance is for the world to pull together to address. if every country but China and India comply then they will be pressured to do so as well. If the US is out, they have the excuse not to cleanup their act. With the US in, there is a chnce for the world to work together on this critical man made issue.

Germany never left. They are not getting close to their agreements and getting worse. That is why they want more Weather Dependent Renewables and talking about rationing power.

That's third world stuff.

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 4:50pm:

With the US in, there is a chnce for the world to work together on this critical man made issue.

Which parts are critical? The parts that have already come or the ones in the distant future?

Edit: BTW- because it is an agreement there is no compulsion. ;)

lee wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 5:01pm:

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:50pm: With the US in, there is a chnce for the world to work together on this critical man made issue. Which parts are critical? The parts that have already come or the ones in the distant future? Edit: BTW- because it is an agreement there is no compulsion. ;)

True.

next step after agreement is compulsion.

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 7:53pm:

next step after agreement is compulsion.

Only with a One World Government. But who or what country would lead that?

lee wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 7:55pm:

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 7:53pm: next step after agreement is compulsion. Only with a One World Government. But who or what country would lead that?

Yes, I am prepared to throw my hat in the ring. Maybe Trump will want a go at that. Build a wall around the world.

We will eventually move to one world government after the next war if we are still around. The UN is useless.

If we don;t act as one, then the future looks bleak.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 4:28pm:

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:22pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:09pm: Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 3:58pm: This is indeed good news. Without some leadership from the US we would never get going on working as one planet to address planetary issues. Will China and India also have the same expensive regulations applied to their industries? No, but this is the stuff that needs to be sorted. My point is, without the US in the club, it provides an excuse for other countries to not play properly. if all the super countries join and lead, there is a chance to influence all the other major polluters. You'd hope so but that hasn't worked so far. The last graphs I saw somewhere showed that China and India are polluting more than ever. I think China builds a new coal fired power station every 2 weeks don't they? ( or is it every week?)

not according to this report bobby...


Despite the 2015 agreement, global carbon emissions increased 1.7 percent in 2017 and a further 2.7 percent in 2018; it has been estimated that the rate of increase in 2019 will be among the highest on record. The last four years have been the hottest on record, with 2019 on track to make it five.


https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/09/climate-change-report-card-co2-emissions/

Super Nova wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 8:04pm:

If we don;t act as one, then the future looks bleak.

Perhaps if you enunciated your concerns we could allay them. ;)

You could be Ted Cruz who thought the Paris agreement involved the actual people of Paris.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 9:51pm:

You could be Ted Cruz who thought the Paris agreement involved the actual people of Paris.

You could be the idiot your village has lost. Who knows?

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 8:40pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:28pm: Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:22pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 4:09pm: Super Nova wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 3:58pm: This is indeed good news. Without some leadership from the US we would never get going on working as one planet to address planetary issues. Will China and India also have the same expensive regulations applied to their industries? No, but this is the stuff that needs to be sorted. My point is, without the US in the club, it provides an excuse for other countries to not play properly. if all the super countries join and lead, there is a chance to influence all the other major polluters. You'd hope so but that hasn't worked so far. The last graphs I saw somewhere showed that China and India are polluting more than ever. I think China builds a new coal fired power station every 2 weeks don't they? ( or is it every week?) not according to this report bobby... Despite the 2015 agreement, global carbon emissions increased 1.7 percent in 2017 and a further 2.7 percent in 2018; it has been estimated that the rate of increase in 2019 will be among the highest on record. The last four years have been the hottest on record, with 2019 on track to make it five. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/09/climate-change-report-card-co2-emissions/

But that report agrees with me.   ::)

lee wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 9:55pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 21st, 2021 at 9:51pm: You could be Ted Cruz who thought the Paris agreement involved the actual people of Paris. You could be the idiot your village has lost. Who knows?

Exactly I mean you set no records for intellect, contrarian.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 21^st, 2021 at 10:00pm:

Exactly I mean you set no records for intellect, contrarian.

And yet I beat you hands down. Native cunning then? ;D ;D ;D ;D

But perhaps you can enunciate some of these fears about the future looking bleak? ;)

I mean you being such an intellectual and all.

DUMB YANKIES spending trillions of dollars to reduce atmospheric CO2 by 18ppm

How much CO2 would be left in the atmosphere...???

If all nations were to spend billions of dollars on the stock exchange mitigating manmade CO2 emissions.

Some science first to get in the picture,

Manmade atmospheric CO2 emissions are approximately less than 5% of the natural atmospheric CO2 that degases from oceans and land every year.

The IPCC actually gives a residence time of about 4 years in the 2007 AR4 WG1 report (see page 948) see below,

The IPCC say manmade CO2 emissions are 35GT/yr from fossil fuels and

Natural CO2 emissions are 766GT every year from oceans and land.

Therefore from the total amount of CO2 in our atmosphere today of approximately 410ppm then,

Berry (2016)

estimates the following,

392ppm comes from natural degassing of ocean and land every year and

18ppm are due to manmade emissions

410ppm - 18ppm = 392ppm,

So if we got rid of all manmade CO2 in the atmosphere we would be left with 392ppm from 410ppm.

Is it really worth it, to try and get rid of so little for so much.

This little bit doesn't really make any difference in the end.

Do you really want to spend billions of tax payer monies on the stock market to reduce the small amount of manmade atmospheric CO2 content of which is 18ppm because the rest 392ppm is natural, unless we attack nature herself..?

Think of it this way how much more higher would the temperature be from 392ppm to 410ppm

I don't think that's the sort of mitigation the IPCC is talking about.


Quote:

Why human CO2 does not change climate by Edwin Berry, PhD https://edberry.com/blog/climate/climate-physics/human-co2-not-change-climate/

Below Scientific papers that conclude human emissions cause only a minor change in the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Manmade CO2 emissions do not continually increase the atmospheric CO2 content as the IPCC claims.

The IPCC Bern model about the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere is wrong, see papers below.

Information based on Berry (2016)

Revelle and Suess (1957)

Star (1992)

Segalstad (1992, 1996, 1998, 2009)

Rorsch, Courtney, & Thoenas (2005)

Courtney (2008)

Siddons & D’Aleo (2007)

MacRae (2008, 2015)

Essenhigh (2009)

Glassman (2010)

Wilde (2012)

Caryl (2013)

Humlum et al. (2013)

Salby (2012, 2015, 2016)

Berry (2016)

Harde (2017)


Quote:

"Carbon dioxide (CO2) is an extreme example. Its turnover time is only about four years because of the rapid exchange between the atmosphere and the ocean and terrestrial biota." IPCC 2007 AR4 WG1 report (see page 948), https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg1-annexes-1.pdf

https://i.ibb.co/1MQYXp4/MNLAOU.jpg

Quote:

Late carboniferous to early Permian time (315 mya – 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperature were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period)

https://i.ibb.co/vZXhshP/atmCo2.jpg
With reference to the graph above.

Quote:

There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today. The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming. https://geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

CO2 concentrations in submarines
https://i.ibb.co/LJNrRts/co2-subs.jpg

Quote:

Costing the Earth: Funding city climate initiatives with green banks by Sue Weekes: News editor, Smart Cities World Green banks are on the rise as cities look for ways to fund essential work to prevent climate change and its effects. The world needs to spend $2.4 trillion every year until 2035 to mitigate the effects of climate change. This was the stark reality delivered by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C. Cities recognise they need to be on the frontline of the action and a growing list have officially declared a climate emergency, including Krakow, London, Liverpool, Paris, New York and Sydney. According to the Climate Emergency Declaration and Mobilisation in Action (Cedamia) website, more than 888 jurisdictions in 18 countries, covering 161 million citizens, have now declared such an emergency. As the IPCC highlights, though, fighting climate change costs and the race is on to find sustainable ways to fund green initiatives in cities around the world. This is bringing new momentum behind the green bank movement. On July 2, Washington, DC Mayor, Muriel Bowser, signed the District’s Green Finance Authority Establishment Act, officially making it the first city in the country to establish a government-funded green bank. The bank is being capitalised with $105 million of public funds. The world needs to spend $2.4 trillion every year until 2035 to mitigate the effects of climate change. The rest here, https://www.smartcitiesworld.net/special-reports/special-reports/costing-the-ear....