G7 communique acknowledges split with U.S. on climate

[Kontinuum]

In an unusual admission, Group of Seven (G7) leaders said in their final communique on Saturday that they had failed to bridge differences over climate change, with the United States unable to join other countries in committing to the Paris Agreement.

"The United States of America is in the process of reviewing its policies on climate change and on the Paris Agreement and thus is not in a position to join the consensus on these topics," the communique read.

"Understanding this process, the heads of state and of government of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom and the presidents of the European Council and of the European Commission reaffirm their strong commitment to swiftly implement the Paris Agreement," it said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-g7...KBN18N0JK?il=0

Reminder:

[Acidbaron]

This was to be expected for the reasons listed, I don't see the purpose of him stalling it for another week.

At this stage we are better off getting China instead of the US in these meetings since they offer more than the US can and actually don't have to deal with a person believing conspiracy theories.

[Lenonis]

I just don't understand climate change denial.

Even if you don't think it's a big problem I don't see why reducing pollution and supporting alternative energy isn't a good thing.

It's so baffling. Even if you aren't a scientist it should just logically flow that cutting down forests, dumping chemicals into the water, and emitting massive amounts of pollution into the atmosphere isn't a good thing.

[Acidbaron]

I just don't understand climate change denial.

Even if you don't think it's a big problem I don't see why reducing pollution and supporting alternative energy isn't a good thing.

It's so baffling. Even if you aren't a scientist it should just logically flow that cutting down forests, dumping chemicals into the water, and emitting massive amounts of pollution into the atmosphere isn't a good thing.

There are several factors in play, education and religion do play a large part. Lack of education on the matter combined with us living in an age of being bombarded with fake news, Religion plays a role in the sense that people believe Jezus will come back and save them all, some even believe he's coming back in their life time, so with that future prospect nothing ever really bad can happen to this planet, since god gave us this planet. (despite the Vatican having an actual science department and not denying it)

Both of those are without a doubt pushed forward by certain interest groups who aim to seek financial gain from it.

[Huehuecoyotl]

I just don't understand climate change denial.

Even if you don't think it's a big problem I don't see why reducing pollution and supporting alternative energy isn't a good thing.

It's so baffling. Even if you aren't a scientist it should just logically flow that cutting down forests, dumping chemicals into the water, and emitting massive amounts of pollution into the atmosphere isn't a good thing.

You don't understand the Trump mindset. It IS a good thing; IF YOU CAN MAKE MONEY FROM IT.

So logically anything that stops you making money is bad. The consequences of you making money are irrelevant to people like that.

[Allybeboba]

Really is a shame an agreement couldn't be reached.

Why isn't China being harassed to join them?

[Skroe]

Really is a shame an agreement couldn't be reached.

Why isn't China being harassed to join them?

Because China isn't part of the G7.

But more broadly, as world leader, the United States is, expected to, you know, lead. With climate change it largely hasn't compared to other countries because of the largely domestic phenomenon of climate change denial.

More is expected of the US than China.

[Allybeboba]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-g7...KBN18N0JK?il=0

Reminder:

Lol... that tweet about it snowing in Texas and Louisiana cracked me up.

- - - Updated - - -

Because China isn't part of the G7.

But more broadly, as world leader, the United States is, expected to, you know, lead. With climate change it largely hasn't compared to other countries because of the largely domestic phenomenon of climate change denial.

More is expected of the US than China.

Perhaps they should be. Maybe we should start expecting the same standards of every country.
Why should one be held to a higher standard than others?

[Acidbaron]

China already does more than the US if we look at their investment in clean energy. It's more like the US is lagging behind.

[Deleted]

Perhaps they should be. Maybe we should start expecting the same standards of every country.
Why should one be held to a higher standard than others?

Because China is already the number one investor in clean energy. If China and Europe can, why isn't the US working under the same standards of every country?

[Noradin]

Because China is already the number one investor in clean energy. If China and Europe can, why isn't the US working under the same standards of every country?

American exceptionalism.

[Wyrt]

Because China is already the number one investor in clean energy. If China and Europe can, why isn't the US working under the same standards of every country?

Because coal workers are in swing states.

[Skroe]

Lol... that tweet about it snowing in Texas and Louisiana cracked me up.

- - - Updated - - -



Perhaps they should be.

They are part of the G20. The G7 is meant to be the time the richest and most powerful democracies come together. That is still the case. China is the only significant economy outside the G20 and it has no place in it because of its economic system.

Bill Clinton brought Russia into the G7 (making it the G8) in order to encourage their transition to democracy and free market economics. That is widely regarded as a mistake. After Crimea, the G8 expelled Russia, making it the G7 again.

There have been on and off again discussions about making the G20 the primary body over the G7, but that's fallen by the wayside every time its tried and the G7 is still the more significant body. China has no place in it.

Maybe we should start expecting the same standards of every country.

Because the United States's global economic, environmental, political and industrial footprint is disproportionate to it's population. Also the United States, as the world's only superpower, is held to a higher standard.

Why should one be held to a higher standard than others?

In large part because it was economic development of the West, particularly the United States, that created the climate change problem. If China and India were to develop exactly along the lines the US and Europe did, scaled for their far greater populations, it would be an ecological and climatic catastrophe for the human race. India and China's very valid argument is "well you did this... so why shouldn't we? It's only fair". The West by offering to take stronger steps for itself now is securing from the developing world immediate commitment to develop different than we did, along a sustainable path. That is really the only viable option, other than accepting that China becoming as developed as the US will wreck the world.

To put it another way, the developing world has pretty much all the leverage: they can simply refuse to comply with Western demands for sustainable development and say "fuck the world". The West, unwilling to see that happen, has had to create leverage. So its developed these deals.

When it comes to climate change, the US has no position of strength to negotiate from by itself.

[PACOX]

He is so fucking embarrassing. Merkel and Prince Henry met with Obama to discuss all sorts of issues while Donnie was also over there. Its bad when they rather speak with our former head of state than the current one.

- - - Updated - - -

China already does more than the US if we look at their investment in clean energy. It's more like the US is lagging behind.

And the US has no excuse because we have an abundance of energy resources to exploit and land to put infrastructure on. The US pioneered nuclear energy a couple board members want to hold on to their outdated/inefficient fuel sources since they wont be around to the climate deteriorate anyway.

[Skroe]

He is so fucking embarrassing. Merkel and Prince Henry met with Obama to discuss all sorts of issues while Donnie was also over there. Its bad when they rather speak with our former head of state than the current one.

They all know the clock is ticking on his Presidency. Remember: they got their own intelligence agencies. And most likely, they know everything.

They shouldn't get close to a loser who will be wearing an orange jumpsuit at the end of his life

And the US has no excuse because we have an abundance of energy resources to exploit and land to put infrastructure on. The US pioneered nuclear energy a couple board members want to hold on to their outdated/inefficient fuel sources since they wont be around to the climate deteriorate anyway.

The problem with Nuclear power in the US is that it relied on market forces (with state incentives) to drive the cost of designs down, but that never happened and because 50 state regulations, every nuclear power plant turned into pretty much its own science project, massively inflating costs.

The superior route would have been what the French did, which is have a competition for a simple, safe winning design facilitate by the government, and then have competitive bidding for construction of that winning design. This would have allowed exploitation of economies of scale. It's broadly similar to how the US has historically procured rockets on multi-billion dollar contracts, or major weapons programs where the government plays a role in the design process. That may not be ideal for most applications, but I think nuclear energy, where just ~100 are built, it makes sense to.

But the core problem with modern nuclear power plants is that no two plants are alike.

A decade ago I had high hopes for nuclear in the US. Now I don't. And it's not just because of the growth of renewables and LNG. It's that we're not serious enough as a country to engage in the regulatory and industry reform to make the most energy dense and scalable source of power generation there is competitive by reducing the entirely artificial barriers to that. I mean it's almost a waste of time to discuss nuclear at this point. Everybody knows exactly what needs to happen, but just like with manned space travel that is years behind schedule, modern Americans are intrinsically incapable of doing hard, big things.

In a way it is fitting we have a non-serious President like Trump. A silly, deluded President for a silly, deluded people who have spent our lives patting ourselves on the back for our parents and grandparent's achievements to such a degree we've lost sight of the extent that our decadence has undermined our capacity to act decisively.

Why is Donald Trump still President despite his blatant emoluments clause violation?
Why is Jared Kuschner not in jail awaiting trial?
Why is it 2017 and all three manned spaceflight programs are 5 years behind schedule and billions over budget?
Why is social security and medicare reform still a ticking time bomb despite discussing the existence of said time bomb since the 1990s?
Why are we talking about the US military as some kind of invincible fighting force when it has experienced clear and measured decline thanks to the wars we've somehow been involved in since 2001 without resolution? Why are these wars under-resourced?
Why are we even having a climate change "debate"?
Why are we discussing how to fix education, fix healthcare and fix government finances despite a whole planet of countries, more and more of which have their act together, and have solved this problems in a fraction of the time?

Somewhere between Francis Fukuyama's "End of History" and when the Bush Administration told America to go shopping, the American people, collectively, lost their balls and their brains. Our failure to develop a mature, modern nuclear policy is as emblematic of it as everything else I listed. We need to find them or one day we'll find ourselves outside of a G-6 that has China, Japan, India, Germany, France and Brazil in it, just as Russia is outside of the G7 now.

[Kontinuum]

Trump tells 'confidants' U.S. will leave Paris climate deal

U.S. President Donald Trump has told "confidants," including the head of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt, that he plans to leave a landmark international agreement on climate change, Axios news outlet reported on Saturday, citing three sources with direct knowledge.

On Saturday, Trump said in a Twitter post he would make a decision on whether to support the Paris climate deal next week.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN18O00J

[Xarkan]

You don't understand the Trump mindset. It IS a good thing; IF YOU CAN MAKE MONEY FROM IT.

So logically anything that stops you making money is bad. The consequences of you making money are irrelevant to people like that.

You are missing a potential part of the equation

Trump probably expects the rest of the world to make up for the US not reducing emssions thus (in his book) hopefully sacrificing competitiveness while the us does not. It would be America First to the fullest.

The solution obviously is for the rest of the world to accept defeat and increase co2 emissions to match the us per capita. Call the bluff so to speak.

[Skroe]

Trump tells 'confidants' U.S. will leave Paris climate deal

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN18O00J

Of course he is. That's why he'll "announce it next week". He isn't finished humiliating US foreign policy yet with his "I'm an Asshole" tour.

- - - Updated - - -

You are missing a potential part of the equation

Trump probably expects the rest of the world to make up for the US not reducing emssions thus (in his book) hopefully sacrificing competitiveness while the us does not. It would be America First to the fullest.

The solution obviously is for the rest of the world to accept defeat and increase co2 emissions to match the us per capita. Call the bluff so to speak.

And that's exactly what they'll do. Not that the Trumpking knuckledraggers will realize that.

Trumpkin nationalism is a really, really stupid version of the word. All emotion, no brains.

[Acidbaron]

You are missing a potential part of the equation

Trump probably expects the rest of the world to make up for the US not reducing emssions thus (in his book) hopefully sacrificing competitiveness while the us does not. It would be America First to the fullest.

The solution obviously is for the rest of the world to accept defeat and increase co2 emissions to match the us per capita. Call the bluff so to speak.

This strategy however will mean that America will be lagging further behind in the automotive industry and green energy, both of which are the future since the old is declared dead and done.

[Eviscero]

You are missing a potential part of the equation

Trump probably expects the rest of the world to make up for the US not reducing emssions thus (in his book) hopefully sacrificing competitiveness while the us does not. It would be America First to the fullest.

The solution obviously is for the rest of the world to accept defeat and increase co2 emissions to match the us per capita. Call the bluff so to speak.

Stop assuming there is more than petulance and greed motivating this half-wit.