Tuesday, September 23, 2014

Obama, Climate Change at the UN . Opinion .

Climate Change is serious business,
but ..............
President Obama addressed the United Nations today , and in simple terms it was about global warming.President Barack Obama on Tuesday said the U.S. and China have a special responsibility as the largest carbon-dioxide emitters to lead a new effort to curb emissions, as he sought to enlist nations around the globe to combat climate change. The BIG QUESTION arises is Are we going to FINALLY *** sign the Kyoto protocol? You'll pardon me if I don't expect much of a pep rally. Even if you get a new treaty, America will refuse to sign it, along with China and India, and where does that leave us? All this hype is nothing but blah , we want other nations to do what we ( America ) refused to do. I have ALWAYS believed and I once blogged about "Our strange weather" lately , yes we have had vary unusual things happen to a degree that will have every one jumping . I HAVE always said that WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD THIS KINDA WEATHER. Science has the  Carbon Dioxide evidence to show  ,  The truth is, it’s actually the other way around: as CO2 has increased, deaths from extreme weather have increased.  President Obama's challenge on climate change  for me is a bit confusing,  since most of the carbon emissions were coming from only a few geographical locations on Planet Earth . (2)>  ( Name the guilty nations : America , Mexico  Russia , India ,  China and Europe EU ). Mr. Obama Specifically, he called out China, saying that the most populous country on Earth, with the fastest increase in carbon pollution, must join the United States to lead the rest of the world in carbon reduction. OK, let's go back to the (1)> Kyoto protocol that Under Bush the United States refused to signA Pew research poll conducted earlier this year found that 29% of respondents listed "dealing with global warming" as a top policy priority -- and that number has remained virtually unchanged since Obama took office in 2009.And a Gallup poll conducted in March 2014, found that a little under a fourth of Americans -- 24% -- list climate change as a national problem that they worry about "a great deal."However, when it comes to addressing climate change, polling indicates most Americans back action. A Gallup poll from June found that 65% of those surveyed support the government tightening pollution regulations on businesses.Obama said the US will continue to lead the way? He's unbearably out-of-touch. What about the emissions created by the war machine Mr President? We have to count that and lead the way on what? In America we are still behind in using alternative energy sources , BLAME the energy companies who have a monopoly with the American congress.  There could be a coming price war where Utility cost could get caught in a spiraling vertex of increasing cost. GE's, at its new pilot fuel cell plant, and many others are working to produce generators that are 65% to 95% efficient with No NOx, SOx, CO, and particulate to be installed initially at commercial office bldg's, then grocery stores, small businesses, etc., that need generators, cost effectively reducing their electricity usage/demand resulting in ever increasing Utility cost for those without these type generators (home owners).  Better Utilities are working now to increase their generation efficiency (reduce carbon emissions) in an effort to reduce the potential usage/demand cost increasing vertex impact of high efficiency peak shaving generation coming online. Obama gave no specific commitment to the Green Climate Funda fund to help poor countries adapt to climate changeand that's seen as key vehicle to facilitate climate negotiations in the next 15 months leading up to a potential binding global treaty on emissions in Paris. The fund arose from the Copenhagen Accord in 2009 with the goal of channelling $100 billion annually to poor countries by 2020. So far, at about $3 billion, it is nowhere near that target. Yet still we have no GREEN ENERGYThe biggest fallacy was that solar and wind generated electricity are a replacement for oil.  Oil is rarely used to generate electricity and not a single journalist has ever pointed that out.  Even dumber is that solar and wind cost more than the regular sources, so the most viable way to even try to replace oil with electricity is to use the cheaper sources, not the more expensive ones. While government subsidies finance inefficient technologies and government obsesses about emissions goals, Germany has ramped up its coal use to 45 percent of total electricity generation, the highest level since 2007.To compete in today’s global marketplace, any country – be it the United States or Germany –needs a sound energy policy, grounded on proven science and tested by the open market. Misguided executive branch overreach and regulatory attacks on energy industries are hardly the way to achieve this policy.Under this administration’s policies, American energy producers are suffering from vertigo as confusing regulatory intrusion throws our healthy market-based energy industries into a spin. Every economic activity involving energy and transportation, which is to say the entire American economy, will be negatively affected. Thirty percent of America's electricity is generated by coal. Many plants will be forced out of business, and with 12 million Americans who already can't find a decent full time job today, you can add to that the many thousands of hard working miners, in Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, who voted for "Hope&Change" at their Unions direction. President Obama famously stated in his first campaign in 2008, "My plans make electricity skyrocket."

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which commits its Parties by setting internationally binding emission reduction targets.Recognizing that developed countries are principally responsible for the current high levels of GHG emissions in the atmosphere as a result of more than 150 years of industrial activity, the Protocol places a heavier burden on developed nations under the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities."The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16 February 2005. The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh, Morocco, in 2001, and are referred to as the "Marrakesh Accords." Its first commitment period started in 2008 and ended in 2012. No binding treaties will be drafted at Tuesday’s summit, and no one expects any countries to make major commitments to reduce carbon emissions. Instead, the stated purpose of the Climate Summit is to provide a space where international luminaries can share ideas and familiarize themselves with the threat posed by man-made environmental change. The hope is that this summit will help motivate global leaders to craft an effective and legally binding treaty when they convene in Paris next year for the UN Climate Change Conference. (1)> U.S. President George W. Bush said in a Danish TV interview back in 2005 , that adhering to the Kyoto treaty on climate change would have "wrecked" the U.S. economy, and called U.S. dependence on Middle East oil a national security problem. oho! Yes he was right then , and goes on to say : "We're hooked on oil from the Middle East, which is a national security problem and an economic security problem," Bush said . "Kyoto would have wrecked our economy. I couldn't in good faith have signed Kyoto," Bush said, noting that the treaty didn't require other "big polluters" such as India and China to cut emissions. (2)> Top world leaders from these countries chose NOT to be there.- China- Russia,- India,- Japan,- Australia- Canada.

No comments:

Post a Comment