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: 3, Insightful) by richtopia on Friday June 02 2017, @04:32AM (21 children)

    by richtopia (3160) on Friday June 02 2017, @04:32AM (#519201) Homepage Journal

    Trump's policies are giving China an opportunity to step forward and lead the world into the new century. If isolationism is the correct choice in the next twenty years is to be seen: isolationism should help with keeping USA jobs stateside, but if the rest of the wold leaves the USA behind the repercussions could be disastrous, even if everyone is employed. I predict that after the Paris accords, we will see the China Investment Bank become a major player and start displacing the World Bank.

    http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/china-paris-climate-accord/ [instituteforenergyresearch.org]

    Disclaimer: I have been drinking and completely ignored the "ignore political bickering" that martyb so politely supplied in the original post.

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

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by richtopia on Friday June 02 2017, @04:48AM (3 children)

    by richtopia (3160) on Friday June 02 2017, @04:48AM (#519208) Homepage Journal

    To follow up on drinking: I did zero research on my post contrary to my normal expectations. I was thinking of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, but that is completely irrelevant to today's discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank [wikipedia.org]

    At the end of the day the Paris Agreement is lose lose for the USA:
    1. Stay in the agreement and suffer the economic growth consequences - I would say this is paying the Devil's due for the last century of oil exploitation, but it is painful to move away from fossil fuels
    2. Leave the agreement and reap the rewards. While the Accords are relatively sparse in ramifications for leavers, I suspect the international community will use this as a spring board to distance themselves from the USA, particularly with the negative feelings towards the current president

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by tftp on Friday June 02 2017, @05:27AM (1 child)

      by tftp (806) on Friday June 02 2017, @05:27AM (#519223) Homepage

      I suspect the international community will use this as a spring board to distance themselves from the USA, particularly with the negative feelings towards the current president

      I can't imagine anyone of significance on this Earth who would be terribly concerned that some countries are and other are not a part of this Paris Agreement.

      • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @01:46PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @01:46PM (#519341)

        Wait, your failure of imagination is now a meaningful indicator of international politics?
        That may be the most narcisstic post I've seen here and we've got idiots like runaway, frojack and the mighty butthurt who are archons of dunning-krueger

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 02 2017, @03:14PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 02 2017, @03:14PM (#519396) Journal

      I suspect the international community will use this as a spring board to distance themselves from the USA, particularly with the negative feelings towards the current president

      Sounds interesting and not necessarily bad.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Whoever on Friday June 02 2017, @05:06AM (13 children)

    by Whoever (4524) on Friday June 02 2017, @05:06AM (#519214) Journal

    Isolationism has never benefited any country in the long term.

    Pulling out was a stupid move. The "accord" was voluntary, not US law and mostly symbolic. So remaining in has zero consequences. Pulling out shows that the current administration isn't interested in the future, isn't interested in working with other countries.

    If the USA continues on this course, it's likely that China will take the lead and the USA will become a backwater. Once all the other countries have transitioned to renewable energy, power will be even more expensive in the USA and hence businesses will be even less competitive.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @05:20AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @05:20AM (#519219)

      Pulling out shows that the current administration isn't interested in the future, isn't interested in working with other countries.

      Bingo! It isn't so much about the CO2, its about the loss of American prestige. Trump only understand guns, he has no concept of soft power. But soft power is what kept the US top dog since WWII. He's pissing it all away just to make a bunch of glorified peckerwoods feel good about themselves.

    • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday June 02 2017, @11:06AM (1 child)

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Friday June 02 2017, @11:06AM (#519301) Journal

      I think that's a pretty big stretch. China couldn't care less about the rest of the world, except as tributary states. It's in their very name, zhongguo ("Middle Country" aka "Country at the Center of the Earth"). Africans, who have been seeing a lot of investment from China, are quickly learning that the Chinese give even less of a shit about the Africans they're extracting the resources from than the POS Americans and Europeans did.

      I surmise we're moving back to a multi-polar world with spheres of influence. Germany's in a really good spot right now, if they can successfully herd the cats. China has had a good couple of decades because Japan and South Korea haven't contended with it directly as they have in the past, but both those places could wake up to the new reality and do so again.

      There's also a non-zero chance that D) could happen and shifting energy and manufacturing economies could reorder the geopolitical realities entirely. We are on the cusp of a global revolution in those respects.

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
      • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @01:50PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @01:50PM (#519345)

        You have a definition of "care" that aligns very closely with Don the Con's definition.
        The more you post, the more I realize you are just a trumpanzee in liberal clothing.

    • (Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Friday June 02 2017, @03:17PM (4 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 02 2017, @03:17PM (#519399) Journal

      The "accord" was voluntary, not US law and mostly symbolic. So remaining in has zero consequences. Pulling out shows that the current administration isn't interested in the future, isn't interested in working with other countries.

      Not seeing the problem. The Paris Accord wasn't a good future. It prioritized first world hysteria over six billion peoples' lives.

      • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Friday June 02 2017, @11:22PM (3 children)

        by Whoever (4524) on Friday June 02 2017, @11:22PM (#519627) Journal

        Yeah, I mean, much of the world becoming uninhabitable, including prime real estate along the US coastlines is nothing to worry about, is it?

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:20AM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:20AM (#519713) Journal

          Yeah, I mean, much of the world becoming uninhabitable, including prime real estate along the US coastlines is nothing to worry about, is it?

          It has to happen first. Getting bombarded into the Stone Age by Nazi-launched Moon cheese would also be a bad thing, but I don't see us radically altering our societies for it. At some point, you also have to evaluate the likelihood of the proposed bad thing happens rather than merely how bad it is. I'll note that nobody has presented evidence that would support your concern. That's what makes it hysteria.

          • (Score: 2, Flamebait) by Whoever on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:33AM (1 child)

            by Whoever (4524) on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:33AM (#519719) Journal

            I'll note that nobody has presented evidence that would support your concern.

            Despite all the information that is available that supports the notion of climate change and its likely effects and you still want a personal link in support? You are a special kind of flower aren't you?

            There is no point posting anything because you will still discount it. You, like many Trumpanzees, are resistant to facts.

            • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by khallow on Saturday June 03 2017, @04:20AM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday June 03 2017, @04:20AM (#519728) Journal

              Despite all the information that is available that supports the notion of climate change and its likely effects and you still want a personal link in support?

              I've perused this information before. It doesn't say what you claim it says. This is the core of hysteria - imaginary dangers.

              There is no point posting anything because you will still discount it.

              You should discount it as well.

              You, like many Trumpanzees, are resistant to facts.

              I think rather you are the Trumpanzee. There really isn't much difference intellectually or politically between the world ending because sea level goes up 10 inches, and illegals takin' our jerbs away because someone can't be bothered to look for work. Too bad you didn't vote for Trump. You could have gotten him to pay lip service to your delusions instead.

    • (Score: 1, Troll) by VLM on Friday June 02 2017, @04:45PM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 02 2017, @04:45PM (#519430)

      the "accord" was voluntary, not US law and mostly symbolic. So remaining in has zero consequences. Pulling out shows that the current administration isn't interested in the future, isn't interested in working with other countries.

      So its useless and pointless so we gotta keep drinking the kool aid.

      The Paris Accords are the environmental equivalent of a Paris Hilton reality show in so many ways

    • (Score: 2) by leftover on Friday June 02 2017, @08:02PM (3 children)

      by leftover (2448) on Friday June 02 2017, @08:02PM (#519551)

      For the US there is the bit about providing $100B per year. That is not mere symbolism.
      The Paris 'agreement' was made by a majority of countries with their hands out and Soros behind the curtain.

      --
      Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
      • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Friday June 02 2017, @11:20PM (2 children)

        by Whoever (4524) on Friday June 02 2017, @11:20PM (#519622) Journal

        https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/02/fact-checking-trump-speech-paris-climate-agreement/102399674/ [usatoday.com]

        The U.S. has pledged $3 billion, but so far has paid $500 million.

        http://www.factcheck.org/2017/05/trump-paris-agreement/ [factcheck.org]

        Perhaps you have been lied to through your news sources.

        • (Score: 2) by leftover on Saturday June 03 2017, @07:36AM (1 child)

          by leftover (2448) on Saturday June 03 2017, @07:36AM (#519767)

          $100B is the amount specified in the 'Paris Agreement', to which the US has not agreed.

          --
          Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @12:33PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @12:33PM (#519826)

            Do you think your word play is actually informative?
            Its $100B split between all developed countries, not just the US.
            Nor it was not an enforceable requirement.

            And its payment for them not to build dirty power plants that dump pollution in our air.
            We built dirty power plants that polluted their air as we modernized, its their right to do the same to us as they modernize.
            Which would you rather have, their pollution or a little more money in the bank accounts of the rich?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @07:14AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @07:14AM (#519251)

    China would experience what the US has taken since WW2 to learn: being at the top and controlling the world is expensive and earns the hate.

    Let's see China get deeply involved in Asia and Africa. Xinjiang will become the way in for the terrorists.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @08:50AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02 2017, @08:50AM (#519277)

      Except China doesn't give a rats ass about "internal politics" of other nations. China only cares about China.

      Let's see China get deeply involved in Asia and Africa.

      They already are. It's US that's on the way out, and rather quickly these days. Killing TPP and now withdrawing from Paris Accords is one giant gift to China in both cases. But yes, requires 2 brain cells to connect those dots.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:29AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:29AM (#519717)

        > Except China doesn't give a rats ass about "internal politics" of other nations. China only cares about China.

        Huh? Where have you been lately. Chinese state-sponsored crackers/hackers seem to be active in the politics of nations all around the world.