Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

governor.wa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 412 posts

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

#311

Post by usaar333 »

refurb wrote: post #306
usaar333 wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a developed country, the US has quite low GDP output per emissions. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ratio_of_... Only Australia (another country full of climate change denialism) and Israel fare worse. Canada is rather comparable. On the other hand, some European countries (e.g. France, UK) are nearly double gdp per emissions. Even Germany with its relatively large industrial sector has far…

That's looking purely at CO2. Not energy.

Why is that relevant?

Either the US has poor energy efficiency (GDP output per energy input) or the US has energy sources that are highly carbon intensive. Both are bad.

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

#312

Post by dkhenry »

propman wrote: post #305
dkhenry wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its bad because its not a level playing field. Its tips the global economy away from Americans because they are too "Developed". Turns out there are lots of Americans in fly over country who disagree.

In 10 years regardless of this agreement flyover country will have more renewable energy jobs than manufacturing jobs lol. Iowa, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Nebraska, North Dakota and Kansas generate 25% of their total energy from just Wind and Texas leads the country in total renewables just from Wind. Yes Texas produces more renewable energy than California. And crazy part, this was almost 90% accomplished in the last…

I agree, and we will continue to see those jobs grow. I don't see this as us moving away from green jobs and a reduced carbon footprint. This is about us signing away our competitiveness because someone thinks it makes things fair. We will continue to produce more renewable energy and continue to make it more economic. Other countries are free to continue as well, but we shouldn't give them money so they can invest in industries that will attempt to undercut domestic firms in the global marketplace.

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

#313

Post by burkaman »

throwaway-1209 wrote: post #197
zachwood wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US was not obligated to pay $100B/yr in the agreement. Obama pledged $3B by 2020. http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/why-trump-seeing...

You guys need to pick which figure to quote. Here's a number from 2015, from NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/12/459502597/... . Quote: "To help developing countries switch from fossil fuels to greener sources of energy and adapt to the effects of climate change, the developed world will provide $100 billion a year". And further: "Developed countries won inclusion of language that would up the ante…

NATO is a great example. The US funded about 22% of the NATO budget last year, which seems about consistent with its size relative to the other members: http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pictures/stock...

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

#314

Post by _jal »

dkhenry wrote: post #290
ryanobjc wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact is the US polluted the living fuck out of the world to get to it's developed status, and then turns around and says "no you cant do that". So a level playing field already makes no sense. The point of this is to achieve reasonable outcomes, while also allowing developing countries to grow reasonably (and live another billion out of poverty) while helping them with it. If the developed worlds can't afford ano…

You are looking at this from a macro level and completely ignoring the actual repercussions these policy's have. These other countries who you are saying need to "Develop" are not behind the "Developed" countries in any metric other then quality of life statistics. However the policy gives them an advantage in a globally equivalent marketplace. So no it isn't a reasonable outcome to ask a sovereign people to not be a…

> These other countries who you are saying need to "Develop" are not behind the "Developed" countries in any metric other then quality of life statistics

That little figure happens to be kinda important. In fact, I'll go out on a limb and state that most people consider their quality of life to be somewhat more important than abstract ideas about global economic policy.

"Fairness" had nothing to do with how we got here. Or, to flip it around, why would any country (let alone the ones the U.S. has abused for various reasons, artificially retarding their growth) agree to a model that dooms their citizens to a pre-industrial life?

This is no different than the arguments for flat taxes because progressive income tax is "unfair".

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

#315

Post by enknamel »

realityking wrote: post #283
enknamel wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no it wouldn't. Per capita doesn't matter as much as total emissions. Amdahl's Law. China contributes more than double the next country in terms of green house gasses, and they are contributing more per capita year over year. This is why China curbing their emissions would have a bigger effect than anyone. If they cut their per capita emissions in half, global emissions will be reduced by 1/6th. If US cuts their…

The problem is that you solution would require telling developing nations that they're not allowed to reach the living standard you and I enjoy - how is that fair?

Why should that matter? All that matters is the environmental damage is reversed. That requires reducing emissions until we produce technology that can massively pull carbon out of the air.

Continuing to insanely pollute the environment in the name of "fairness" is a great way to destroy the world.

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

#316

Post by throwaway-1209 »

burkaman wrote: post #313
throwaway-1209 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You guys need to pick which figure to quote. Here's a number from 2015, from NPR: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/12/459502597/... . Quote: "To help developing countries switch from fossil fuels to greener sources of energy and adapt to the effects of climate change, the developed world will provide $100 billion a year". And further: "Developed countries won inclusion of language that would up the ante…

NATO is a great example. The US funded about 22% of the NATO budget last year, which seems about consistent with its size relative to the other members: http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pictures/stock...

That's some weird set of numbers you got there. But I got a better one: http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/02/daily-c....

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

#317

Post by prawn »

cderwin wrote: post #186
stevenleeg wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 whatev…

No, he or she was just observing that natural warming/cooling moves pretty randomly, and even if we can null out the human effect on it, we need to be able to withstand a dramatic change in global temperature.

Are you sure it's random? I think there have been reasonably regular cycles through history? e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

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

#318

Post by burkaman »

enknamel wrote: post #133

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 com…

How does leaving the agreement help to pressure China?

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

#319

Post by enknamel »

burkaman wrote: post #318
enknamel wrote: post #133

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 com…

How does leaving the agreement help to pressure China?

I never suggested it does or doesn't. It's just a bad agreement for the world compared to one that gets China to actually curb their emissions.

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

#320

Post by prawn »

xienze wrote: post #129
yks wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Postpone immediate danger until we're sufficiently technologically advanced to deal with other issues? Or, in other words, build MVP first instead of starting the heavy project which ultimately cannot be finished by the deadline.

Well I mean give me a taste here, what technology are we talking about that will keep the earth's climate stable in the face of natural warming and cooling periods that have occurred throughout its existence?

In the short to medium term, improvements in energy/battery technology that would help maintain habitations and agriculture in areas that would otherwise become problematic. It will take time for that to reach poor/remote areas of the world and limit migration issues we've already seen.
Post reply on HN