Action on climate change is an "urgent duty" - COP22 delegates

[rooster59]

Action on climate change is an "urgent duty" - COP22 delegates

 

 

In theory, the aim of the COP 22 summit was clear: to implement the Paris agreement to limit the rise in temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius. But in practice, the international community had to hammer out the details, risking the re-emergence of national interests.

 

Donald Trump’s victory raised deep concerns among delegates. Trump had denounced the Paris agreement and threatened to pull out of the deal.

 

An ‘urgent duty’

 

But almost 200 nations gathered in Marrakesh declared fighting climate change was an “urgent duty.”

 

“What you see is also great determination of the other parties [countries participating at COP22] in clearly messaging to the United States, if you go out of this deal you are making a mistake because the world is going into a certain direction,” said Bas Eickhout, Dutch GreenLeft politician. “Of course you can say we’re going into another direction. But it’s a bit silly and it’s not where the jobs are. So if you want jobs then you have to follow where the world is heading to. And that message really comes strong out of Marrakech.”

 

 

Irreversible momentum

 

In a statement, ministers at the Marrakesh meeting said momentum for cutting greenhouse gases was “irreversible” and reaffirmed their commitment to “full implementation” of the Paris accord.

 

“COP22 was important on two fronts of irreversibility,” Pierre Cannet from WWF France told Euronews. “Firstly, political irreversibility, to make sure that we can find a way so that this agreement can work, and to ensure that it can happen in 2018.

 

“A global gathering makes it possible to collectively move towards an acceleration of action.

 

“Secondly, an irreversibility in the political messages that have been addressed here by the heads of state, heads of government, to finally say that these countries are ready to fulfill their commitments.”

 

In Marrakech, governments, civil society and the financial world have understood each other. But the speed of implementation is still inconsistent.

 

“The real economy is actually moving faster than governments at this moment,” explained Ulriikka Aarnio, senior policy officer UN climate negotiations for CAN, Climate Action Network Europe.

 

“So we can assume, we can hope there will be lots of over-achievements that we can then harvest and lots of excitement around the world to do more on the low carbon economy. So definitely we are talking towards the same goals but the question is that governments still need to speed up because this transition that is required is huge.”

 

The 2015 Paris Agreement to limit climate change entered into force on November 4 after winning swift backing from major greenhouse-gas emitters led by China, the US and the EU, opening a harder phase when they will have to keep their promises for action.

 

At the COP22 summit this week, French President Francois Hollande warned that inaction on climate change would be “disastrous for future generations and dangerous for peace.”

 

US Secretary of State John Kerry expressed hopes Trump might change his mind once in office.

 

The proclamation, a political statement of intent with no legal force, affirmed plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions blamed for raising world temperatures and causing more downpours, heat waves, and rising sea levels.

 

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2016-11-19

 

[Pimay1]

Show me the money.

[fasteddie]

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis - Forbes

 

"urgent duty" to collect the suckers money and enslave them under Agenda 21.

[impulse]

So, the question is, sign the agreement and violate it with impunity or don't sign it.

 

I'm not a climate change denier.  But watching our international competitors violate just about every agreement they sign, while our businesses fork out $$ trillions to comply, doesn't make sense.

 

Just like the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.  We go to jail if we bribe a foreign official.  Our international competitors get to write it off as a tax deduction.  

 

Hopefully, Trump will address the fairness issues as he's promised.  We'll see.

[impulse]

6 minutes ago, fasteddie said:

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis - Forbes

 

"urgent duty" to collect the suckers money and enslave them under Agenda 21.

 

For a few $$ hundred thousand, I can get a peer reviewed study saying Martians are causing the hottest years on record.  Okay, maybe a few $$ million if it's to be the Martians.  Peer reviews cost more if it's Martians.

[kevkev1888]

Hopefully Trump will stand up against this!

[edwinchester]

Why so against cleaner energy?

We'll have less pollution.

There will be less respiratory disease.

The development of new technology will advance mankind.....and just think these are benefits even for deniers.

It may also save the majority of species living on this planet.

[puipuitom]

When you are in a plane, are you then also going to chalenge the stability by all running to one side ?

Why you do that with the earth ?

Long time ago, CO2 was converted in O2 + Carbon, what we now call coal. We are doing now the reverse.

 

A grain specialist told me at Kesetsart: + 3 C average will cause only ONE rice crop per year in S.E. Asia, so NOT enough to feed everybody.

No problem, in a couple of years nature will have corrected the population. In normal words: starvation till a new equilibrium.

Same with Latin America: maise /corn crop will be reduced.

Middle East: only a few will survive.

[elgordo38]

6 hours ago, impulse said:

I'm not a climate change denier.  But watching our international competitors violate just about every agreement they sign, while our businesses fork out $$ trillions to comply, doesn't make sense.

Well well well a statement that truly makes sense. China is the worst country for riding roughshod over these agreements. They lied and cheated their way into the pockets of greedy US businessman and now the pollution has been clocked at being the worst in years. You would never want to sit at a poker game with Mr. Xi. Mean while American workers are sucking in clean air minus good paying jobs. 

[jcsmith]

That 3 year old article is completely dated. Almost all scientists now believe that climate change is happening at this stage. 

 

So other countries won't abide, why should America? Well America is the worst. The US right now bears the largest amount of blame for these problems, followed by China and Russia. This issue affects everyone, it affects the entire world. If Trump tries to pull out here, there will be repercussions internationally and for future generations.

 

Cleaner energy solutions are a win/win. They will help stave off global warming. They will make for a healthier living environment. They will be cheaper over the long run for consumers. They will only hurt the big business which is profiting from fossil fuels. 

[impulse]

17 minutes ago, jcsmith said:

That 3 year old article is completely dated. Almost all scientists now believe that climate change is happening at this stage. 

 

So other countries won't abide, why should America? Well America is the worst. The US right now bears the largest amount of blame for these problems, followed by China and Russia. This issue affects everyone, it affects the entire world. If Trump tries to pull out here, there will be repercussions internationally and for future generations.

 

Cleaner energy solutions are a win/win. They will help stave off global warming. They will make for a healthier living environment. They will be cheaper over the long run for consumers. They will only hurt the big business which is profiting from fossil fuels. 

 

Something needs to be done.  America needs to participate.  But Google "climate cheats" and follow some of the links, including:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/aug/24/kyoto-protocols-carbon-credit-scheme-increased-emissions-by-600m-tonnes

 

http://morganfoundation.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/ClimateCheat_Report9.pdf

 

America didn't sign the Kyoto Protocols.  Our international competitors did, and most of them aren't abiding by what they signed.  Some of them are making $$$ hundreds of billions cheating.  Is the Paris agreement going to be any better?  Not as long as they can cheat with impunity.  

 

Would you bet on poker against a guy who's using marked cards, or golf for money against a guy who moves the ball whenever you're not looking?

[IAMHERE]

$100 Billion in 'aid' to be given to the lesser nations by the top ten or so to assist them in their efforts. Yes, it would be URGENT to get that payoff for signing an agreement that cost your nation nothing and the money go into your special accounts.

Why America and a few others would get themselves on the hook for that kind of money and absolutely nothing to show for it other than fleeting goodwill is beyond me.

The Paris Accord is nothing but a ripoff of the American & some EU taxpayer.

[boomerangutang]

       Antarctica is melting faster than prior years.  In the dead of their winter last year, there were temps as high as 50 degrees F.   During their summer, as high as 60 F.    Ice shelves are degenerating fast, enabling ancient glaciers to travel faster to the sea - to calve and melt.  

 

recent National Geographic article and a few brief videos

[jcsmith]

4 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

Why America and a few others would get themselves on the hook for that kind of money and absolutely nothing to show for it other than fleeting goodwill is beyond me.

 

Because of they don't we're headed towards disaster which will cost much more than that investment.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎19‎.‎11‎.‎2016 at 4:02 PM, edwinchester said:

Why so against cleaner energy?

We'll have less pollution.

There will be less respiratory disease.

The development of new technology will advance mankind.....and just think these are benefits even for deniers.

It may also save the majority of species living on this planet.

No one is for pollution, except everyone that drives an oil propelled vehicle, uses electricity created by oil, flies in a plane or eats food grown with oil powered machinery.

When everyone goes back to bicycles, uses trains and holidays at home the world will be taking the threat seriously.

Till then, everyone that preaches about G W and uses a car is being less than creditable.

 

If governments were serious, they could solve the problem next year, but they won't, because they know the population won't accept what is necessary to change it.

[RickBradford]

Quote

In theory, the aim of the COP 22 summit was clear: to implement the Paris agreement to limit the rise in temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius. But in practice ...

 

The Green/Left is very good at theory, their computer models telling them exactly what they want to prove, and combined with an unearned sense of moral superiority, very good at telling other people what they "should" be doing.

 

In practice, however, they'd be hard put to throw a hat in the air and have it hit the ground. The climate twerps are the worst -- where do they get them - Sanctimonious Hypocrites 'R' Us?

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

       Antarctica is melting faster than prior years.  In the dead of their winter last year, there were temps as high as 50 degrees F.   During their summer, as high as 60 F.    Ice shelves are degenerating fast, enabling ancient glaciers to travel faster to the sea - to calve and melt.  

 

recent National Geographic article and a few brief videos

That article is about the peninsula, which is not typical of Antarctica.

Those of us in McMurdo Sound used to be somewhat envious of those that worked on the banana belt, as it was much warmer there.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Antarctica

Monthly means at McMurdo Station range from −26 °C (−14.8 °F) in August to −3 °C (26.6 °F) in January.

 

Change is coming for sure, always has ( trees used to grow in Antarctica ), and always will.

[ilostmypassword]

44 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

That article is about the peninsula, which is not typical of Antarctica.

Those of us in McMurdo Sound used to be somewhat envious of those that worked on the banana belt, as it was much warmer there.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Antarctica

Monthly means at McMurdo Station range from −26 °C (−14.8 °F) in August to −3 °C (26.6 °F) in January.

 

Change is coming for sure, always has ( trees used to grow in Antarctica ), and always will.

It's not about change. It's about the rate of change.

[fasteddie]

7 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

       Antarctica is melting faster than prior years.  In the dead of their winter last year, there were temps as high as 50 degrees F.   During their summer, as high as 60 F.    Ice shelves are degenerating fast, enabling ancient glaciers to travel faster to the sea - to calve and melt.  

 

recent National Geographic article and a few brief videos

And yet even scaremongers like NASA say the opposite

 

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

[fasteddie]

12 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It's not about change. It's about the rate of change.

It's about Agenda 21.

[jcsmith]

13 minutes ago, fasteddie said:

And yet even scaremongers like NASA say the opposite

 

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

 

That's an old article. Here's one from NASA 2 days ago: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-nears-finish-line-of-annual-study-of-changing-antarctic-ice

 

A quote from that...

Quote

Antarctica is heading into austral summer, a period of rapid sea ice melt in the Southern Ocean. But this year the sea ice loss has been particularly swift and the Antarctic sea ice extent is currently at the lowest level for this time of year ever recorded in the satellite record, which began in 1979.

 

And the all-encompassing NASA opinion on climate change here: http://climate.nasa.gov/  and if you want the quick path to see that they are aware and recognize it visit this page: http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

 

Some NASA quotes:
 

Quote

Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.⁴

 

Quote

All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880.⁵ Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years.

 

Quote

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.^12,13 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.¹

 

 

Edited November 20, 2016 by jcsmith

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

It's not about change. It's about the rate of change.

I'm not disagreeing, but nothing we can do will change it one iota. To imagine that a few windmills will actually make a difference when millions of new cars are on the roads every year and air travel is supposed to increase drastically in the next few years is LAUGHABLE. I scorn the politicians that say we have to do something, but never say what it is WE should do while THEY carry on as normal.

 

A Chinese style campaign to limit every woman to one child would be a good start, but I doubt that that is ever going to happen.

 

As far as I am concerned, either humanity reduces it's numbers to that of the early 20th century or less, or it is the end of humanity, along with a lot of other species. People just can't keep breeding and expect to survive. The mass migration into Europe is a result of overpopulation in their home countries.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, jcsmith said:

 

 

 

Some NASA quotes:
 

 

 

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.^12,13 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.¹

 

I was scorned on another climate change thread a while back for claiming exactly that. LOL.

[ClutchClark]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm not disagreeing, but nothing we can do will change it one iota. To imagine that a few windmills will actually make a difference when millions of new cars are on the roads every year and air travel is supposed to increase drastically in the next few years is LAUGHABLE. I scorn the politicians that say we have to do something, but never say what it is WE should do while THEY carry on as normal.

 

A Chinese style campaign to limit every woman to one child would be a good start, but I doubt that that is ever going to happen.

 

As far as I am concerned, either humanity reduces it's numbers to that of the early 20th century or less, or it is the end of humanity, along with a lot of other species. People just can't keep breeding and expect to survive. The mass migration into Europe is a result of overpopulation in their home countries.

 

Exactly.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, jcsmith said:

 

 

Some NASA quotes:
 

      Quote

Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.⁴

 

 

 

Melting sea ice as in the Arctic and surrounding the Antarctic makes ZERO difference to sea levels. It is only if the Greenland or Antarctic ice caps melted that sea levels would rise due to melting.

[boomerangutang]

Deniers, don't bother reading this Boston Globe story - you're pre-wired to diss it.. . . . . .     

 

It's info you don't like to hear:   how ice is melting fast at both poles, while not being replaced.

[gemini81]

On ‎11‎/‎20‎/‎2016 at 8:58 AM, fasteddie said:

It's about Agenda 21.

Right you are. A political agenda to stack, pack and tax. Ain't buyin' it!

[boomerangutang]

      A study was just released (end of year, 2016) by Yale and George Mason Universities that involved a national survey of Americans. Almost 70% of US voters believe the US should participate in international agreements to limit global warming. Only 1 in 8 registered voters believe the U.S. should not participate in such agreements.

 

     When considered by party affiliation, the responses were 85% for Democrats, 62% for Independents, and 52% for Republicans. Even among Republicans, whose elected officials systematically denigrate science, a majority of US voters agree about the importance of taking climate change seriously, and taking tangible steps to lessen it.

 

source: Renewable Energy Fund, Miami, Florida

[jcsmith]

On 11/19/2016 at 2:35 PM, fasteddie said:

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis - Forbes

 

"urgent duty" to collect the suckers money and enslave them under Agenda 21.

That guys news is complete propaganda, might want to check with who was actually surveyed and where. 

[Scott]

Post with questionable sources has been removed.   Continuing to post fake news will result in suspensions.