WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance • Hacker News Board

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#131

Post by stevenleeg » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:45 PM UTC

xienze wrote: post #107

One thing I never see addressed with all the talk about climate change: Let's say we managed to cease our CO2 production, even reverse the current man-made warming trend (save me the "impossible hypothetical scenario" talk, substitute in whatever values of "cease" we would have accomplished with the Paris Agreement, whatever). Eventually, the earth is going to warm significantly without the aid of mankind. What are w…

> Eventually, the earth is going to warm significantly without the aid of mankind

What exactly are you referring to here? The sun expanding and becoming hotter as it ages? If so we're talking about the timeline of a few billion years. Climate change is something that has already begun to affect us and will continue to worsen over the course of the next few decades, which makes this issue far more pressing than whatever "natural warming" you're referring to.

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#132

Post by s0uthPaw88 » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:45 PM UTC

toisanji wrote: post #90

I would read the full speech from Trump, he makes some good points, although im sure some of it is false and not sure how it compares to other factors. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/01/politics/trump-paris-agreement... "For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years -- 13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India makes its participation…

Here is a fact check for many of these quotes: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/jun/01/...

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#133

Post by enknamel » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:45 PM UTC

There is a massive difference between caring about the environment and following the Paris Climate Agreement. We as a country can do a ton to reduce our damage to the environment. However it is going to be a drop in the bucket to what some third world and massively developing countries will contribute. Follow Amdahl's Law. The biggest emitters should get the biggest spanking.

This is why Paris Agreement is almost completely worthless. China is the largest contributor of green house gasses in the world and emits about a third of all the green house gasses. (if not drastically more given the shady reporting). And they want to give China a free pass to keep polluting the world for another 13 years while every other country gets their emissions under control?

I'm very pro environment and any serious agreement must have China curbing their emissions now. They emit twice the green house gasses as the US (which is the number 2 contributor). That cannot be allowed to continue.

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#134

Post by xienze » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC

angrydev wrote: post #122

xienze wrote: post #107

One thing I never see addressed with all the talk about climate change: Let's say we managed to cease our CO2 production, even reverse the current man-made warming trend (save me the "impossible hypothetical scenario" talk, substitute in whatever values of "cease" we would have accomplished with the Paris Agreement, whatever). Eventually, the earth is going to warm significantly without the aid of mankind. What are w…

Your strawman is showing

Which would be what? The fact that the earth goes through natural warming and cooling periods?

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#135

Post by colechristensen » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #37

artpop wrote: post #20

This is starting to sound like the “Rim States” from the science fiction novel Black Man (Thirteen) by Richard K. Morgan. Basically the blue and red states separate in the future because they couldn’t resolve their differences. The blue states go on to prosper and the red states languish. It struck me how plausible it sounded when I read it. Now with the commander in shit-the-bed Donald Trump and the rising tide self…

While I'm happy that the states are picking up the slack, are you really insinuating that the Red states are leading to their own self-destruction, going on to "languish"? I'm saddened that people have this viewpoint over such a large swath of the country.

Well if you sort the states by per-capita income and compare electoral votes in the last election:

* Top 25 states 213 D / 52 R

* Bottom 25 states 11 D / 252 R

so it might seem like there's believable evidence that red states are behind and it correlates with political affinity.

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#136

Post by Shivetya » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC

tmh79 wrote: post #62

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm happy that the states are picking up the slack, are you really insinuating that the Red states are leading to their own self-destruction, going on to "languish"? I'm saddened that people have this viewpoint over such a large swath of the country.

Background: I am a [former] republican, grew up in flyover country, from a family full of trump supporters, now I live in California. I believe that the red states are going to languish for the following reasons: 1) Brain drain as young ambitious people leave 2) Public services (education, roads, etc) decrease in quality, increase in expense 3) Older folks increasingly capture all of the economic gains allowed in sma…

there are enough example states to refute it. hell Illinois is poster child for failed Democratic policies and their debt is now junk status. Quite a few other blue states are in the same boat with exploding debt.

blue states tend to be such only because of dense city populations in super cities; discounting California. Get outside those big metropolis with their outsides voting power and it shifts.

I am a decidedly red state and not one of the claims is valid so I seriously doubt its valid all places. thousands of successful small businesses are started each year. Where you will get crushed in big city blue states where regulation protects incumbent businsses even more than in rural areas (let alone taxes)

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#137

Post by devindotcom » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC

toisanji wrote: post #90

I would read the full speech from Trump, he makes some good points, although im sure some of it is false and not sure how it compares to other factors. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/01/politics/trump-paris-agreement... "For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years -- 13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India makes its participation…

Worth noting that we can't even really leave the Accord until 2020, so there's a lot of political posturing involved here.

This was all debated for years, so none of this should come as a surprise to anyone. We went into this eyes WIDE open.

China got a good deal, yeah, because it had leverage: it's the manufacturing capitol of the world. It could very easily have walked away with no commitments at all.

As for developing countries, of course we are going to ship our coal jobs over there - they can't afford to build renewables right now and must bootstrap with cheaper in-country energy stores like coal. Meanwhile we can afford the latter and should not be using dangerous and dirty methods just to save money.

100 billion over many years spread across dozens of countries really isn't that much. This is just another way for Trump to say we should be spending money on the US. We should, but we also have responsibilities to the rest of the world that predate all this stuff. We're part of a global community and he is trying to back out of it.

I seriously suspect his numbers in that last one are off or highly misleading. We should all watch for responses from those in know.

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#138

Post by jbattle » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC

larsiusprime wrote: post #56

jensenbox wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it sounds nuts, but why not merge into Canada? Just get Oregon on board and you are golden.

It's unconstitutional and would trigger a second civil war? The federal position on the secession question has been pretty affirmatively settled: "no."

There is a distressingly large portion of the country that would love to see California leave the us. (Or Kansas or Texas or New York).

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#139

Post by jbattle » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC

larsiusprime wrote: post #56

jensenbox wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it sounds nuts, but why not merge into Canada? Just get Oregon on board and you are golden.

It's unconstitutional and would trigger a second civil war? The federal position on the secession question has been pretty affirmatively settled: "no."

There is a distressingly large portion of the country that would love to see California leave the us. (Or Kansas or Texas or New York).

Re: WA, NY and CA Governors Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance

#140

Post by jorblumesea » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 11:47 PM UTC

toisanji wrote: post #90

I would read the full speech from Trump, he makes some good points, although im sure some of it is false and not sure how it compares to other factors. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/01/politics/trump-paris-agreement... "For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years -- 13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India makes its participation…

Most of that is either incorrect, or completely missing the point.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/jun/01/...

China and India need to industrialize and modernize in order for them to transition to cleaner energy sources. Per capita, they produce only a fraction of what we do.

It's unrealistic to expect developing nations to shoulder the same burden as developed ones. The deal is weighted to put more on the countries that have modern economies able to make the transition. Idea being that western developed nations can transition into renewables far faster and make up for the developing world's inability to do so, and at least somewhat mitigating temperature rise.