SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
President Donald Trump plans to make good on his campaign vow to withdraw the United States from a global pact to fight climate change, a source briefed on the decision said on Wednesday, a move that promises to deepen a rift with U.S. allies.
White House officials cautioned that details were still being hammered out and that, although close, the decision on withdrawing from the 195-nation accord - agreed to in Paris in 2015 - was not finalized.
[...] The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Trump was working out the terms of the planned withdrawal with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, an oil industry ally and climate change doubter.
[...] The CEOs of Dow Chemical Co, ExxonMobil Corp, Unilever NV and Tesla Inc all urged Trump to remain in the agreement, with Tesla's Elon Musk threatening to quit White House advisory councils of which he is a member if the president pulls out.
Source: Reuters
On Twitter, Trump indicated that an announcement was coming soon.
"I will be announcing my decision on the Paris Accord over the next few days," he wrote. "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
[...] Opponents of the climate deal were concerned after White House economic advisor Gary Cohn told reporters that the president was "evolving on the issue" during his trip overseas.
His daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner reportedly channelled support for the deal behind the scenes at the White House, encouraging climate change activists that Trump might change his mind. Trump's Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the former Exxon CEO, also supported remaining in the treaty.
Source: Brietbart
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Geezer on Thursday June 01 2017, @09:57AM (11 children)
Everything the scary-clownish US government touches, regardless of (D) or (R) regime, touches turns to shit. Bloated, bureaucratic, crony-capitalist shit.
I see this case of disengagement as a win for the planet.
Europe and Asia can get on with whatever works (or not) for them. Godspeed.
Meanwhile, the evolving and growing market for renewables will gradually solve the problem by disrupting the global fossil-fuel economy naturally.
The energy market is gradually responding to advances in technology in spite of old-money resistance to change and the machinations of their puppet government. It is the nature of disruption.
In this case, technology has the potential to solve the problem without, or in spite of, the Beltway Bozos' greasepaint smears on it, thank you very much.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01 2017, @12:48PM (1 child)
New, green capitalists will eat old, smoky capitalists - that is how it always happens.
I never understood how could anyone think that keeping the things old way would bring in more profits then changing everything. Going environmentalist resonates so good with planned obsolescence mantra, because every n years you will be forced to upgrade every thingamajig to more environmentally friendly thingamajig, including some very heavy, very expensive stuff. And that is so much job, and so much profit! Given an external unattainable goal without an exit condition (like "War on ... something"), economy can really thrive indefinitely. On the contrary, if economy only plays with itself, it gets hick-ups. So there really has to be a "follow the leader" game, a mission & vision, etc. Kennedy did it with space program, Reagan did that with his armament program, but it is all dwarfed by even greater endeavors which were taken in late XIX century with first large global infrastructure projects around the world - steamboat shipbuilding, railroads, telegraph and telephone, ... Today if we chose to stop the global warming, it would be a huge boost for economy similar to that from late XIX century, because we have to change almost everything, it is almost like as building it anew. New empires wait to be founded. It is very shortsighted to keep oneself out of it just to protect some old sunken investments.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday June 01 2017, @02:57PM
The exit condition is in fact well-defined: Reduce global average temperature to approximately what it was about 10 years ago, then go for carbon neutrality after that.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01 2017, @01:23PM (8 children)
That's utter bullshit.
You've been brain-washed by the republican modus operandi of "the government is incompetent and if you elect us we will prove it."
When government works, it doesn't get coverage because "nothing wrong here" is not news.
For example, I bet you heard a lot about Solyndra. I bet you didn't hear that the loan-guarantee program that backed Solyndra actually turned a profit [reuters.com] despite the expectation of congress that it would lose money because the intent was to back R&D that was too risky for Wallstreet. The very technologies you are holding up as proof that government is unnecessary were the intended dividends of that government program.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday June 01 2017, @08:53PM (4 children)
And I hear we've always been at war with Eastasia. Words aren't automatically true. And let us note here that there is no way for the loan guarantee program itself to turn a profit. By definition, it is pure loss. Indeed, they mention later on:
So the US Treasury loans are what is actually generating a profit, maybe. Given the magic accounting that pervades the federal government at all levels, it is trivial to lose vast sums of money and generate a profit. Just have the US Treasury or some other department feed more money into these projects so they can keep paying interest payments. My bet is that a lot of the more marginal projects under this loan program will go south now that they don't have a friendly administration in charge.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01 2017, @09:10PM (3 children)
Are you familiar with the phrase, "distinction without a difference?"
Because if you aren't, you really, really ought to be.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday June 01 2017, @09:55PM (2 children)
The difference here is that we have introduced an easy mechanism for hiding losses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01 2017, @10:18PM (1 child)
Ah, the magical hand-wave of conspiracy theory where the only evidence is lack of evidence.
Unsurprising.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 02 2017, @12:12AM
No, sorry, they cooked the books.
(Score: 2) by Geezer on Thursday June 01 2017, @09:17PM (2 children)
Actually, I vote anarcho-syndicalist. Think Noam Chomsky. Or this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vl4ufIrMtXg [youtube.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01 2017, @10:16PM (1 child)
Who cares how you vote?
The fact is you bought their narrative hook, line and stinker.
Notice how you had no rebuttal to the facts, only to your perceived accusation of being a republican rather than simply falling for the republican line.
(Score: 2) by Geezer on Friday June 02 2017, @12:18AM
You really are an insufferable little twat, aren't you? I can be childish too, see:
Hillary lost. Neener, neener, neener. :p