Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday June 02 2017, @03:50AM   Printer-friendly
from the promises-kept dept.

[Ed Note: What follows is the official press release from President Donald Trump at the White House. It marks the official stance of the United States pulling out of the Paris Agreement. Though there is certainly a political aspect to this, I would like to see if we can try to avoid political bickering and focus discussion on the actual details of the press release. See, also, our previous coverage, Report: Trump Plans to Exit Paris Climate Agreement. --martyb]

From the desk of President Donald J. Trump

For Immediate Release

June 01, 2017

President Trump Puts American Jobs First

“Our government rushed to join international agreements where the United States pays the costs and bears the burdens while other countries get the benefit and pay nothing.” – President Donald J. Trump

ALREADY THE WORLD’S ENERGY LEADER: The United States had already become the leader in cutting CO2 emissions while still leading in oil & gas production.

  • In the United States, energy related carbon dioxide emissions have significantly declined since before the Paris Climate Accord was negotiated, and will continue to decline as a share of worldwide emissions, particularly when compared to other nations such as China and India.
    • The Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) 2017 Annual Energy Outlook reports that, from 2005 to 2016, energy related carbon dioxide emissions fell at an average annual rate of 1.4%.
    • Emissions are projected to continue to fall from 2016 to 2040. 
    • Meanwhile, the EIA reports that emissions in the developing world are expected to double their 2005 levels by 2040.
  • According to recent U.S. Energy Information Administration, the United States remained the world’s top producer of oil and natural gas combined.
  • The United States continues to be a world leader in energy, but increased competition from countries like China demonstrates the need for policies that enable America to compete on a global scale.

HARMFUL TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: The Paris Climate Accord could cost the United States economy millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in economic output over the next several decades.

  • According to an analysis by National Economic Research Associates (NERA), meeting President Obama’s commitment under the Paris Climate Accord would cost the United States nearly $3 trillion by 2040.
    • By 2040, the American economy could have 6.5 million fewer industrial sector jobs, including 3.1 million fewer manufacturing jobs.
    • Industries such as cement, iron and steel, coal, natural gas, and petroleum would be forced to cut production under President Obama’s Paris Climate Accord.

SHOULDERING THE BURDEN: Under the Paris Climate Accord, the United States would carry the burden while other countries would get the benefits.

  • Under the Obama Administration, which signed an agreement without having to deal with the economic repercussions, the United States was committed to reducing CO2 emissions by between 26 and 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025.
    • Meanwhile China can continue to increase emissions for the next 13 years.
  • The United States already contributed $1 billion to a UN Green Climate Fund. This would increase to $3 billion under pledges made by the previous Administration.

INEFFECTIVE: Even if every nation fully complied with the Paris Climate Accord, it would barely impact the climate.

  • According to researchers from MIT, if every nation that signed the Paris Climate Accord met all of their commitments until the end of the century, the impact on the climate would be negligible.

PROMISE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: President Trump is fulfilling his promise to the American people to stop international agreements that disadvantage the United States.

  • May 26, 2016, then-candidate Trump:
    • “President Obama entered the United States into the Paris Climate Accords— unilaterally, and without the permission of Congress.”
    • “So foreign bureaucrats are going to be controlling what we are using and what we are doing on our land in our country. No way.”

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by n1 on Friday June 02 2017, @04:05AM (15 children)

    by n1 (993) on Friday June 02 2017, @04:05AM (#519190) Journal

    Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs apparently used this opportunity to make his first ever tweet. [twitter.com]

    Today's decision is a setback for the environment and for the U.S.'s leadership position in the world. #ParisAgreement

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday June 02 2017, @04:10AM (1 child)

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday June 02 2017, @04:10AM (#519191) Homepage

    Let the Californians deal with it. I'm sure they will.

    Hahahahahahahahaahahahahahahaahhah!

    • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Friday June 02 2017, @04:58AM

      by Whoever (4524) on Friday June 02 2017, @04:58AM (#519210) Journal

      Let the Californians deal with it. I'm sure they will.

      Aren't you a Californian? What are your plans?

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by SanityCheck on Friday June 02 2017, @04:10AM (9 children)

    by SanityCheck (5190) on Friday June 02 2017, @04:10AM (#519192)

    Wow, now we know Trump made the right play. I'm sure GS had it's filthy fucking hands into whatever shitty scheme the Globalists cooked up to allow US to continue it's current CO2 emission levels, but pay some sort of a fee, of which they would happily cut something off the top. Someone did some quick math and the deal would cost every American worker $7K, not to mention the jobs that would be lost.

    • (Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday June 02 2017, @04:17AM (7 children)

      by SanityCheck (5190) on Friday June 02 2017, @04:17AM (#519196)

      Jesus Christ he is getting torn to shreds by Meme Jihadis and normies alike.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @04:47AM (6 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @04:47AM (#519207)

        What does "normies" mean ?

        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday June 02 2017, @05:04AM (5 children)

          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday June 02 2017, @05:04AM (#519213) Journal

          It's something edgy edgelords of extreme edginess like this jackoff call people they believe to be insufficiently edgy. The irony is that the kind of person who thinks "normie" is an insult with any weight is, in almost any social/economic/cultural measure you can think of, almost certainly close enough to the mean to stand atop the peak of the distribution.

          --
          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Friday June 02 2017, @05:25AM (2 children)

            by cubancigar11 (330) on Friday June 02 2017, @05:25AM (#519222) Homepage Journal

            So do you use this word?

            • (Score: 3, Funny) by aristarchus on Friday June 02 2017, @05:43AM

              by aristarchus (2645) on Friday June 02 2017, @05:43AM (#519225) Journal

              "So, whose brain was it"
              "Abby someone, . . . Abby Normal, yeah, that's what it was!"

            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday June 02 2017, @06:07PM

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday June 02 2017, @06:07PM (#519487) Journal

              Only in one context: when one of said edgelords accuses someone else of being one. My response is typically some variant of "Hate to break this to you, but given you're white, middle class, American, and upholding the status quo, *you* are the "normie," not your target. In case you need this explained to you, supporting the status quo is by definition the least rebellious thing you can do."

              This generally happens when people go "ooooh lookit me, being all politically incorrent! so edgy! so rebellious! Cuck cuck cuck faggot cuck libtard hurr hurr!"

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday June 02 2017, @11:51AM (1 child)

            by SanityCheck (5190) on Friday June 02 2017, @11:51AM (#519313)

            It's perfectly fine to be a normie. Some of my best friends are normies.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @07:03PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @07:03PM (#519940)

              Did you just try to "some of my best friends are black" your way out of that?
              Hilarious!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @04:58AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @04:58AM (#519211)

      Wow, now we know Trump made the right play. I'm sure GS had it's filthy fucking hands into whatever shitty scheme the Globalists cooked up

      I guess you've never heard of virtue signaling. Because an after-the-fact tweet ain't going to make a difference.

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @06:21AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @06:21AM (#519234)

    Carbon trading is obviously loved by traders. It wouldn't just be innocent purchase of credits, with polluters buying from "green tech" makers and countries that save forests.

    First of all, traders get to skim off the top. Pretty much the whole economy would pass through their hands, with them taking a cut.

    Then there is the opportunity for high-frequency trading and bubbles. Recall the problems with gasoline prices that shot up from $2/gal to $4/gal, or from $3/gal to $6/gal in expensive states, and then right back down again a little later. Recall the housing bubble. Recall how Enron caused blackouts in California. Traders don't give a fuck that normal people might use resources for something other than gambling.

    Carbon trading was the ultimate fantasy for that asshole. Of course he's bummed to lose the opportunity to extract money from the entire US economy. He cares not for the environment. He can go fuck himself, then die in a fire.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 02 2017, @01:03PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 02 2017, @01:03PM (#519332) Journal
      I'll note also that carbon markets tend to have hard caps. That is, there is a fixed, not-to-be-changed amount of carbon credits supplied at any given time. The problem is that it causes an abrupt transition from a very elastic market where demand is easily met by the cap to a very inelastic market when demand exceeds the cap. That allows for extremely profitable market cornering. Just buy up a bunch of credits, transitioning the market into the inelastic mode, driving the price up of credits, and then sell your credits for substantial profit. Lather, rinse, repeat.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @01:42PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @01:42PM (#519339)

      > Then there is the opportunity for high-frequency trading and bubbles.
      > Recall the housing bubble. Recall how Enron caused blackouts in California

      Your post reads like you just threw together a list of every conceivable problem with any kind of market and just assumed that's the way carbon credits work.
      Its pretty weak sauce.

      And what do you propose instead of carbon trading?