It wasn’t that long ago that laundry detergent had phosphates that polluted our rivers. Phosphates were banned.
Freon has been restricted in most Air Conditionng units because it harms our atmosphere.
Example after example of the US busting it’s ass to clean our air and water.
How much more are we supposed to do? How much more environmentally committed can we be?
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Yeah, China has a shit environment but they are spending more on green tech than any other nation, even more than the US despite having a smaller economy.
http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/green_stimulus_spending2.preview.png
Chinese low cost manufacturing and spending creating a giant market will drive down costs for renewables for the rest of the world.
Maybe you can explain to me, since I am only a cartoon horse, how the US federal government apparently abandoning any concern for CO2 emissions improves China’s (and the rest of the world’s) air quality.
It doesn’t really matter a whole lot. The agreement does nothing, was never ratified by us and would never have been ratified. It’s a big nothingburger.
What’s amusing is that people shriek about climate change as if it’s an issue that should be above politics, and yet accept the usual political non-solutions to the problem as evidence of progress. It’s not. We either hold warming to under 2 degrees or we’re screwed. And accomplishing that requires action that is several orders of magnitude beyond what is politically possible. There is no “baby steps” way to get to this goal. It truly is an all or nothing proposition. All incrementalism gets us is a brake on economic growth and then we’re still screwed 80 years down the road.
“It’s not working. We’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas!” - Ned Flanders
Scientists have made it pretty clear what it would take to limit warming to 2 degrees: a lot more than anyone is willing to do. Oh, and even if we did everything, we’d still need a big technological save. How we’d get that with our 80-year worldwide depression that we inflicted on ourselves is not clear.
You’re missing the point. +2 degrees might be inevitable, but the rate at which we get there makes a big difference. If we hit it by 2060, we’re probably screwed. If we can delay it to 2100, that’s an extra 40 years to adapt, which is a big deal. Following the Pairs accord might make that difference.
Meanwhile, people like you have a hard time explaining exactly what these dire economic straits are. Most actual studies show that pursuing greener energy is good for the economy.
Since the OP asked for my “thoughts,” here is one: I live in Chicago. It is WAY too cold here 75% of the year. If the average temperature of the planet increased by 10 degrees C, I think I’d be fine with that. Yeah, I know it would be inconvenient for some of the coastal folks, but I think I could live with it.
His mom or dad said that, actually. 
Yeah, but not for long without being self-sufficient.
That is very likely to be true, but there are no guarantees and it amounts to hope more than a plan. It basically comes down to “we’ll figure something out”. Which, being humans, we often do, but it’s far from a guaranteed thing.
Where economic consequences come into play is in setting real targets that we will adhere to even if we have to lower emissions through brute regulation or high energy prices. Problem is, that’s the only way to lower emissions that can reasonably be called a plan.
dup post
The human race hasn’t been required, nor able, to do a lot of world-shaping and global decisions so far. Even up to WWII everything has been strictly local.
Sure, but inventions can have global effects. Imagine someone figuring out how to make a battery that can power your house for 30 years. That would cut emissions drastically. The invention of electricity is what got us into this mess in the first place.
Ahh, you’re right. I admit to fake news!
Well, aside from such a rise making it very likely that the tropics would become completely uninhabitable, there are the approx. 634 million people who would be “inconvenienced” just so you don’t have to wear an overcoat in the winter.
Just sayin’, as a practical matter, maybe you should consider moving to the Houston area instead.
Yeah. I’ve lived in Chicago almost my whole life. I’d have to move to Canada if it became average 10C warmer each year. Chicago is not a particularly cold place, except maybe in the depths of winter, and this winter it was mild, hitting the 70s in February.
The world’s weather patterns have shifted throughout time.
There was a significant cooling off Europe in the middle ages. Its formally called the Little Ice Age. The River Thames froze.They used to have ice skating on it.
Then the weather pattern shifted warmer.
That’s what happens on this huge planet. Every few centuries weather patterns change. It’s normal.
The sky isn’t falling because the weather patterns change.
It’ll swing back cold again in a few hundred years.